backpack nationalism
canadian identity & the american gypsy
anne stevenson ba msc
Over ten million Canadians tuned into the final men’s hockey game of the Salt
Lake City Olympics in 2002, the highest rating for any sporting event ever in
Canada.1 The match between Canada and the United States marked not only an
historical event in the world of hockey, but epitomized pervasive trends in the
current construction of Canadian identity. Nationalism in popular contemporary
culture – particularly among young adults – has been noticeably shifting towards one
exemplified by antagonism towards our southern neighbours and flag-totting, sportsteam nationalism. This newly emerging identity in the mass media has changed the
way in which Canadians express their identity, and in doing so, has fundamentally
altered the nature of that identity. Popular contemporary Canadian nationalism is full
of sound and fury, but signifies nothing.
Building on Barth’s notions of boundary maintenance, the construction of
popular Canadian identity will be examined, including an emphasis on the role of the
United States as a negative template for definition. This study will draw on a variety
of sources, including television, print and electronic publishing. Following will be an
analysis of how a new construction of identity has in turn affected the way in which
many Canadians practice that identity. Evidence will demonstrate that prevailing
trends have altered the way in which Canadians express their nationalism, and in
doing so, undermined the very markers which define that identity.
Discussion of Canadian nationalism, as in most countries, is complicated by
the multiple identities and affinities of its citizens. Most notably in Canada are issues
related to First Nations People, French-Canadian culture, regional divides and
immigrant communities. Each of these groups, as well as each individual, has a
unique relation to the state and their status as a Canadian has a varying character and
poignancy. For this analysis, however, discussions of ‘Canadian’ will pertain
specifically to popular expressions of nationalism, as found in mass media and public
celebrations. Since much of the media discussed is targeted at an approximately 1729 age group, this paper can be viewed as pertaining specifically to this population
segment, although broader trends will also be considered.
Though rarely framed as such, Canadian nationalism lends itself well to the
methods of analysis used for ethnic groups. Ethnicity has generally been described by
anthropologists as populations which share common culture and values, composes a
field of interaction and communication, is identified by both itself and others as
distinct, and is biologically self-perpetuating.2 Aside from issues of reproduction (the
link between lineage and nationality being especially ambiguous), Canadian
nationalism satisfies these descriptors. Although the exact meaning of ‘Canadian
values’ is contentious, it can be generalized that virtually all citizens conceive of a
greater national character. Extensive social and communication networks exist
throughout the country allowing for contact and exchange. Canadians are recognized
internationally as a distinct population, and a majority of its inhabitants would
identify as such.
Canadian identity, however, has changed drastically during its existence. At its
very inception, Canadian nationalism was inextricably tied to loyalty to Britain. The
proud proclamation of the country’s first Prime Minister gives a most striking
example of this: “A British subject I was born, and a British subject I will die. With
my utmost effort, with my last breath, will I oppose the ‘veiled treason’ which
attempts by sordid means and mercenary proffers to lure our people from their
allegiance.” Although the unique economic conditions of Canada no doubt played a
significant role in this, 3 loyalty to Britain pervaded many aspects of Canadian identity.
From the federal parliament building – “a less claustrophobic but no less rowdy clone
of Westminster”4 – to many societal norms, the strength of early Canadian identity
was as strong as its ability to mimic that of Britain.
These notions of loyalty to Britain are almost wholly alien in contemporary
expressions of Canadian nationalism. Starting shortly after the First World War, trade
relations with Britain became less vital to Canada as commerce with the United States
grew in its importance. 5 Along with the economic shift away from Britain came a
cultural one as well; few Canadians continue to regard British markers as important to
identity. In 1997, only 8% of Canadians responded correctly that the Queen was the
Head of State, and only 11% named the Governor General.6 When asked which
system Canada’s governmental structure resembled, only 53% named the UK. 7 That
Canadian identity is now independent of British cultural reference is well articulated
by popular Canadian writer, Will Ferguson: “The Canadian sense of self is [not] so
frail and delicate a bud that the only thing [protecting it] is an English lady in a funny
hat…We are not…British. Or French. Or Void. We are something else. And the
sooner we define this, the better.”8
This definition, however, has often eluded Canadians. The 1990s in particular
posed a number of challenges to Canadian identity. Domestically, the Mohawk
uprising in Oka in the very early years of the decade forced many Canadians to
acknowledge the fault lines that ran beneath a supposedly united nation. The
prominence of Quebec separatism throughout this time further underscored the
divisive forces within Canadian society. The failure of the Meech Lake Accord was a
most concrete demonstration of the lack of a common outlook. Internationally, the
end of the Cold War marked a repositioning of geo-politics; the relevance of
Canada’s ‘Western’ identity dissolved with the Soviet Union. Canada was also subject
to the forces of emerging globalization trends. The challenges to national identity
created by globalization have been widely analyzed, 9 and Canada was no exception to
its effects.
The apparent tenuousness of Canadian identity has led many to conclude that
it is not a particularly potent one; there have been frequent pronouncements that
‘Canadian nationalism’ is essentially an oxymoron.10 Such sentiments were particularly
visible among social scientists in the 1990s. At this time, many commentators were
concerned with the lack of a cohesive national identity. An interesting progression
can be noted in a series of books entitled A Passion for Identity. The books include a
collection of works by various Canadian contributors, including both academics and
artists, and are focused on exploring the dynamics of Canadian culture. Published
first in 1986, two additional editions were released in 1992 and 1997. In the
introduction to each volume, editor David Taras reflects on his changing perception
of Canadian identity. When writing in 1986 he was convinced that the strength of the
social bonds that kept Canada together were stronger than the forces pulling it apart.
In 1992, he believed that Canada was beginning to lose its “sense of place.” By 1997,
he proclaimed Canada to be “adrift in crisis,” unanchored in its identity and at a loss
to define itself.11
Yet what was often overlooked by academics and commentators is that while
the content of Canadian identity was shifting, the form of it was not; that is to say,
the existence of a Canadian identity was rarely convincingly challenged. Indeed the
very ubiquity of studies of ‘what it is to be Canadian’ attest to the persisting
importance of that identification framework. Fredrik Barth’s consideration of ethnic
groups offers considerable insight into this phenomenon. Breaking from tradition,
Barth, in his introduction to a collection of essays in Ethnic Groups and Boundaries,
sought to examine the mechanisms through which distinct identities are maintained
despite the flow of personnel and the changing nature of cultural content. He
insightfully articulates that what is consistent about ethnic groups is their boundaries,
not their substance.12 Barth’s analysis therefore focuses on the points of interaction
between ethnic groups and the methods by which the borders are preserved.
Barth distinguishes two types of identity markers: overt signals and signs, as
well as basic value orientations.13 He notes that the choice of these idioms is often
arbitrary in their relations to the ideology behind the identity being constructed,
however are integral in dichotomizing one group from another.14 This method of
investigation is particularly well suited to an examination of Canadian nationalism; it
has been both dynamic in its composition and relatively static in its borders.
Although the relationship between the two countries has varied, America has
persistently served as ‘the other’ against which Canadian identity is measured. Barth’s
model of boundary maintenance is clearly demonstrated in contemporary popular
nationalism.
In 1999, Molson’s released what was soon to become the iconoclastic “I am
Canadian” ad campaign. A marketing review in the Globe & Mail offers a most
eloquent description of the strategy: “[it] tries to build a connection between the
[Molson] brand and Canadian pride, with a touch of anti-Americanism.”15 The
campaign was launched with what became known as Joe’s Rant. This commercial
features actor Jeff Douglas standing at a podium with Canadian images projected on a
screen behind him. He delivers the following statement:
“Hey. I'm not a lumberjack, or a fur trader, and I don't live in an igloo or eat blubber, or
own a dog sled, and I don't know Jimmy, Sally or Suzy from Canada, although I'm certain
they're really, really nice. I have a Prime Minister, not a President. I speak English and
French, not American, and I pronounce it 'about', not 'a boot'. I can proudly sew my
country's flag on my backpack. I believe in peacekeeping, not policing; diversity, not
assimilation; and that the beaver is a truly proud and noble animal. A tuque is a hat, a
chesterfield is a couch, and it is pronounced zed: not zee – zed!!' Canada is the second largest
land mass! The first nation of hockey! And the best part of North America! My name is Joe!!
And I am Canadian!”
Joe’s rant is interesting for a number of reasons and offers an excellent
template for discussion on Canadian nationalism in recent years. The document is
replete with examples of both signals and value orientation markers aimed at
dichotomizing Canada from the United States. Overt signs of differentiation are
employed repeatedly in this rant. As predicted by Barth, it is unclear why such things
as winter ware, furniture and square acreage are chosen as markers of cultural
distinctiveness, however they gain special significance through their selection.
Value orientation signals are also prominent in Joe’s Rant. Pride in Canada’s
perceived role in international peacekeeping as well as cultural diversity is openly
expressed. These two points demonstrate an understanding of a Canadian character
that is fundamentally based on non-aggression and cultural acceptance. This is an
essential point and will be revisited shortly.
An equally important aspect of Joe’s Rant is its treatment of the United States.
The monologue is implicitly, yet absolutely clearly, directed towards Americans. As
predicted by Barth, overt signals are those that are specifically distinct from the
United States; diverging vocabulary and pronunciation are emphasized. The opening
lines of the rant are a response to stereotypes that Canadians often feel Americans
have towards them. Implied in these words is that citizens of the United States are
ignorant – particularly of Canada – and especially self-centred in their understanding
of the world. More direct characterizations of American value orientations are offered
in the negative Canadian definition of self; Americans are considered as an
international aggressor and intolerant of diversity. The centrality of Americans in
Joe’s nationalist manifesto is undeniable.
Joe’s Rant was a massive advertising success. In 2001, it won the advertising
industry’s Gold Quill Award, beating out the competition of 951 advertisers
representing 17 countries. Many Canadian companies followed suit, recognizing that
Canadian patriotism has significant currency. Evidence of the competitive edge
offered by appealing to nationalism can be found in an Angus-Reid poll which
examined Canadian’s e-commerce behaviour. Over 83% of respondents looked
specifically for Canadian sites when browsing. Although economic factors such as
tariffs and shipping & handling were noted as important determinants, 49% strongly
agreed that they chose Canadian sites out of “patriotism.”16 Obvious displays of their
Canadian origin were therefore a benefit to these internet businesses.
The clothing company, AllMaple, is a business based squarely on appealing to
nationalist sentiments. The store motto echoes ethnic movements of late: “For
Canadians, by Canadians.”17 Velocity FCC’s Canadian Clothing is another example.
The company aims to design clothing that show Canadians are “confident, unique
and, of course, proud.”18 The apparel features prominent Canadian flags and slogans
like “Proud.” Overt displays of nationalism have become the norm; with an identity
based on pride in one’s country, it is only natural to display it. There has been a
proliferation of “Canada Kicks Ass” paraphernalia and sewing flags to knapsacks is a
very visible trend. In 2003, 68% of Canadians agreed strongly that the national flag
was the most important symbol of Canadian identity; it won over national parks and
hockey.19
Since the late 1990s, a profusion of anti-American sentiment also began to
occur in the mass media, closely tied to the rise of Canadian nationalism. Granatstein,
author of Yankees Go Home? argues that some form of anti-Americanism has persisted
throughout the history of Canada. He traces this trend back to the earliest days of
confederacy, following its course until the mid-1990s. At the time of writing in 1995,
Granatstein concludes that anti-Americanism has ceased to be a potent force in
Canadian society as a result of Canadians becoming increasingly like Americans with
each passing day.20
There is some evidence to support Granatstein’s latter claim. In a number of
visible ways, Canadians are becoming more similar to Americans. Canadian
consumption of American cultural exports is overwhelming. Of all television
programming watched by Canadians, only 35% originates in Canada. It is important
to note that this figure is an overall average and includes local news casting. When
comparing dramas, foreign programmes receive nearly 4 times the audience as
Canadian shows. Additionally, Canadian programming has been decreasing in
Canadian content, which now accounts for only 57% of material of the total 35%.
This means that only 19.6% of television watched by Canadians is visibly Canadian. 21
Canadian consumption of American music follows a similar pattern. Of the total
$723 million sound recording industry, only 15% of releases contained Canadian
content or was performed by Canadian artists.22 Whatever pride Canadians feel in
their own artists is certainly not expressed in their purchasing patterns.
The increase in American cultural consumption has been mirrored in a decline
in demand for Canadian programming. There has been a dramatic reduction of
audiences for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), generally considered as
a stalwart guard of Canadian identity and culture. A survey conducted by Statistics
Canada in 1997 noted that the percentage of Canadians who watched CBC Television
had dropped by 30% between 1992 and 1997, from 83% to 54%. Of that 54%,
25.8% reported watching only 1 to 2 hours weekly. The trend was even across various
segments of the population, including considerations of both education and income
levels. For example, lower-middle class had the highest proportion of watchers, at
67%, while the lowest proportion, found among households with incomes greater
than $80,000, was 54%. Additionally, Canadians with some post-secondary education
were most likely reported to watch at 60%, and the lowest – those with elementary or
secondary school – were close behind with 55%.23 Listenership of CBC radio has also
dropped significantly with only 25% of Canadians tuning in. Particularly striking is
the numbers among 15-24 year olds, with only an average of 9% listeners.24
Yet Granatstein was only half right. Even as Canadians have gravitated more
strongly to American culture, anti-Americanism has proliferated and amplified in its
fervour. In addition to its persistence, it is also important to note a distinct change in
its character. In the past, criticisms were centred more on economic and political
factors. Take, for example, the popular CBC news-satire in the 1960s, This Hour Has
Seven Days. During the Vietnam War, the show featured skits described as
“lampooning the Americans with unaccustomed savagery.” 25 Criticism was harsh, yet
confined to politicians and the military; it targeted the American government, not the
people.
Even more recently, there is evidence that Canadians did not wholly reject
American political and economic cooperation. The late 1980s debate over the Free
Trade Agreement (FTA) was a focal point for the discussion of Canadian character
and its relationship to the United States. There were fears of political annexation;
many felt that the FTA would set in motion an eventual political union, one which
would completely eliminate the autonomy and cultural distinctiveness in Canada. 26
Throughout the decisive 1988 election campaign, however, opposition leaders were
often forced to curb their anti-American rhetoric; their Conservative counterparts
were able to effectively discredit their opponents with accusations of antiAmericanism.27 This tactic was very successful among voters, prompting defensive
statements like Liberal Sergio Marchi: “[we are] not suggesting that we take the
Americans to the cleaners or to be anti-American.” A similar clarification was made
by NDP member Steven Langdon, stating that his party’s denunciation of the FTA
was “in no way motivated by anti-American considerations.”28 That the
Conservatives – nominally the pro-American party – won the election is testament to
the moderate nature of anti-Americanism in Canada at the end of the 1980s.
This moderation is in direct contrast to contemporary society. AntiAmericanism is prevalent in Canada, and has in many ways shifted from critiques of
economic and political policy to direct attacks on the American people themselves.
Take, for example, the CBC progeny of This Hour Has 7 Days. On April 1st, 2001, This
Hour Has 22 Minutes first aired a new segment entitled “Talking to Americans.” The
show consisted of Canadian comedian Rick Mercer interviewing Americans about
their knowledge of Canada. The first viewing of the show enjoyed 2.7 million
viewers, an unprecedented number for original Canadian programming. 29 By the end
of its fifth airing, over 6 million Canadians had watched it. The segment is aimed at
showcasing American ignorance; the inevitable conclusion is that Americans of all
walks of like are woefully oblivious to anything Canadian. It is not a direct critique of
political policy, but rather a ‘personal’ attack on American people.
Popular Canadian humour has also displayed similar sentiments. One joke
goes as follows:
“In a train there was a Canadian, an American, a spectacular looking blonde and a
frightfully awful looking fat lady. The train happens to pass through a dark tunnel, and the
unmistakable sound of a slap is heard. When they leave the tunnel, the American had a big
red slap mark on his cheek. The blonde thought – “that American son of a bitch wanted to
touch me and by mistake, he must have put his hand on the fat lady, who in turn must have
slapped his face.” The fat lady thought – “this dirty old American laid his hands on the
blond and she smacked him.” The American thought - "That damned Canadian put his hand
on that blond and by mistake she slapped me. The Canadian thought – “I hope there's
another tunnel soon so I can smack that stupid American again.”
There is no explanation as to why the American is stupid or deserving of
slapping, it is simply a given. This joke apparently resonates strongly with Canadians.
On one website, it has been read by 2153 people and received a perfect rating of 10
out of 10.
The prevalence of this common-sense attitude towards Americans in Canada
is difficult to fully capture. Much of it is undocumented, passing in daily conversation
with offhanded, disparaging comments about Americans, assuming that, as people,
they are inferior and hopeless. Actions described as “American” are ones with which
people take exception. These anti-American attitudes, however, are strangely
juxtaposed with the above mentioned demand for American cultural exports. This
asynchronous behaviour towards Americans suggests a more complex process in
Canadian’s relationship with the United States.
Interesting parallels to this behaviour can be found in Mattijs van de Port’s On
Mud and Gypsies. He eloquently describes both the repulsion and fascination that
Serbs feel towards gypsies. There is intense and pervasive discrimination towards the
gypsies; Degrading jokes are made, negative attributes and behaviour are associated
with gypsies and they are the target of much abusive behaviour. Yet, van de Port
notes that Serbs flock to gypsy dances and fortune tellers; there is an undeniable
fascination with these wanderers. He asserts that the gypsies play an important role
for Serbs’ understanding of self; it provides a negative template against which their
identity can be based, and also allows Serbs to explore “their own prohibited and
hidden impulses.”30 Although van de Port’s analysis is more nuanced and focused on
the mechanisms of coping with recent traumatic experiences, there are similarities in
Canadian attitudes towards Americans.
Barth makes an interesting note about group belongingness: being a member
“implies a claim to be judged, and to judge oneself, by those standards that are
relevant to that identity.” To do so, however, a break must be made from Barth’s
analysis; it now becomes incredibly important to consider the cultural stuff with
which the form of the boundaries is maintained. Upon examination, it is clear that
there is a major discrepancy between Canadians’ construction of nationalism and
their actions that speak to that identity.
As noted before, a central value orientation articulated in Joe’s Rant was nonaggression and constructive passivity. On Canada Day, 2001, a riot in Edmonton
involving over a thousand participants (most returning from a Molson’s sponsored
event) caused hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of damage to local businesses.
Flag-bearing revellers vandalized and looted shops while hurling beer bottles –
Molson’s Canadian, it may be presumed – at attending police officers. A similar
incident occurred in Cloverdale, BC on July 1, 2003. It took 30 police officers 90
minutes to quell the disturbance.31 Firework-watching crowds in Vancouver also
rioted on July 1st, 2003, throwing rocks and beer bottles at police. 32 Although similar
outbreaks have occurred in Canada, they have most frequently been associated with
hockey games and rock concerts. That the expression of sports team and national
loyalty could be so similar is perhaps a reflection of the depth of meaning behind the
statement “I am Canadian.” These Canada Day riots are a far cry from Joe’s
declaration of peacekeeping pride.
Other popular expressions of Canadian identity are equally antagonistic and
aggressive; “Canada kicks ass” is a statement that leaves little room for discussion or
diplomacy. For a country that has often berated Americans for their mindless
patriotism, this is a particular irony.
Anti-Americanism is itself another contradiction of a central identity marker in
Canadian nationalism; cultural acceptance. Canadians have long prided themselves on
their openness to others and non-prejudiced behaviour. Although the extent to which
this is true for all ethnic groups is debatable, it is decidedly not applicable to citizens
of the United States. If the American in the above mentioned train joke was
substituted for any ethnic character, a majority of Canadians would be outraged at its
racist and offensive intent.33 However in its current anti-American form, it has been
wildly popular. Again, the very markers by which Canadians differentiate themselves
have been undermined by new expressions of nationalism.
There is further evidence of Canadians exhibiting precisely the “prohibited”
characteristics for which Americans are frequently criticized. Ignorance is a
particularly interesting case point. Joe’s Rant clearly highlights American ignorance,
not to mention ‘Talking to Americans.” But what of that of Canadians? Aside from
knowledge of other countries, many Canadians are woefully ignorant of their own.
The Dominion Institute of Canada was created in response to a growing concern
among young Canadians at the erosion of a common sense of history. The group has
been involved in a number of high profile citizen surveys, the most popular being the
annual Canada Day quiz which tests the knowledge of Canadians in various Canadian
issues. The results are often startling. In 2003, only half of Canadians received 50%
on an exam on Canadian involvement in international affairs since the Second World
War. In 1997, the Canadian citizenship exam was administered to resident Canadians.
Only 55% of respondents were successful at ‘gaining’ citizenship.34
This trend can be seen in some ways to extend beyond popular expressions of
nationalism. In virtually all commentary on Canadian identity, social equity – most
importantly universal healthcare – has been seen as central to its distinctiveness.
Many Canadians take pride great pride in the social security offered to all its citizens,
and actively reject the American values of self-dependency. Yet recent years have
been witness to a growing wealth disparity between Canadians. Between 1984 and
1997, the real median wealth fell in bottom three deciles of the population, but rose
by 27% in the top three.35 There may be a number of factors behind this trend,
however voter demand can be seen as an important determinant. Particularly in
provincial elections, there has been a growing shift to the right with voter support for
governments that advocate for lower taxes, and thus fewer social services. 36 While
Canadians continue to espouse the ideals of social equality, fewer are willing to pay
for it.
There is still much that differentiates Canada from the United States. Recent
moves towards endorsing gay marriages and legalizing marijuana are excellent
examples of the socially progressive tendencies among the country’s leaders and
citizens. Yet the American gypsy has allowed Canadians to ignore emerging
contradictions in their society. It is inadequate to merely be not as bad as the
Americans; Canadians must be as good as their word. There is need for national
scrutiny and reflection; without this, the boundaries which have for so long defined
our identity will collapse.
Slam Sports. “CBC’s Game 7 Broadcast Draws 2.589M viewers.” Toronto: Canoe Inc, June 10, 2003.
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam030610/nhl_ananj1-ap.html
2
Naroll, Raoul. “On Ethnic Unti Classification.” Current Anthropology, Vol 5(4). Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, October 1964. p. 283-311
1
It has been argued that Canada’s unique economic conditions encouraged a continued bond with Britain.
Unlike the Atlantic Sea Port, the Great Lakes’ economy was centered on the fur trade, one which was
heavily dependent on access to European markets.
Innis, Harold. “Conclusion from the Fur Trade in Canada.” A Passion for Identity: An Introduction to
Canadian Studies, Third Edition. Ed. David Taras & Beverly Rasporich. Toronto: ITP Nelson, 1997. p. 21
3
Anonymous. “Paul Martin’s Tall Agenda.” The Economist Vol. 368, No. 8384. London: The Economist
Newspaper Limited, September 27th, 2003. p. 35
5
Granatstein, J.L. Yankee Go Home? Canadians and Anti-Americanism. Toronto: HarperCollins
Publishers Ltd, 1996. p. 68
6
Anonymous. “Citizenship Exam Survey of 1997.” The Dominion Institute. Toronto: Angus Reid Group,
Inc, November 10, 1997. p. 5
7
Baker, Chris. “Political Illiteracy Bodes Ill for Reform.” Environics Research Group. Winnipeg:
Winnipeg Free Press, Thursday, November 7th, 2002.
http://erg.environics.net/news/default.asp?aID=502
8
Ferguson, Will. “Great Canadian Quotes.” Ed. Curtis Sanderson. Toronto: Canada4Life.ca 2005.
http://www.canada4life.ca/quotes.php
9
Scholte, Jan Aart. “Globalization and Community.” Globalization: A Critical Introduction. New York,
NY: Palgrave, 2000. p. 159-184
4
10
Virtually all literature on the subject of Canadian identity expresses some degree of ambiguity. See:
Flint, John E. “Reflections on British Imperial and Canadian History.” Canadian Journal of African
Studies. Toronto: Canadian Association of African Studies Vol. 15, No. 1. 1981 p. 51-54
“We are a very confused people.” (p. 53)
Clarke, George Elliot. “White Like Canada.” Transition, No. 73. Durham: Duke University Press 1997. p.
98-109.
“…it is emblematic of a larger crisis of Canadian identity. It is difficult enough to figure out what it means
to be Canadian…” (p.98)
Taras, David. “Introduction: The Crisis of Canadian Identity. A Passion for Identity: An Introduction to
Canadian Studies, Third Edition. Ed. David Taras & Beverly Rasporich. Toronto: ITP Nelson, 1997. p. 1
12
Barth, Fredrik. “Introduction.” Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. Boston: Little Brown and Co. p. 55
13
Ibid. p. 14
14
Ibid. p. 35
15
McArthur, Keith. “Iconic Line ‘I am Canadian’ Put on Ice.” The Globe & Mail. Toronto: Bell
Globalmedia Publishing Inc., March 15 2005.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050315/RMOLSON15/TPBusiness
/Canadian
16
GDSourcing.com. “Canadian Internet Stats Pack.” Toronto: Ispos-Reid Canada, 2005.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:226biCJX554J:www.gdsourcing.ca/StatsPack2.pdf+marketing+repo
rts+use+of+canadian+patriotism&hl=en
17
Anonymous. “Enter our Store!” Allmaple Clothing: Allmaple Clothing Co, 2004.
http://www.allmaple.ca/
18
Anonymous. “About Velocity.” Velocity Fresh Canadian Clothing: Canadian Clothing.ca, 2005.
http://www.canadianclothing.ca/aboutvelocity.html
19
Baker, Chris & Jack Jedwab. “Patriotism and Canadian Identity.” Environics Research Group &
Association for Canadian Studies. Monday, May 26, 2003. p.2
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:TLmywgggpgQJ:www.acsaec.ca/Polls/Poll40.pdf+number+of+canadians+who+have+canadian+flags&hl=en
20
Granatstein. Yankee. p.283
11
Anonymous. “Television Viewing, Fall 2002.” The Daily. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, Friday November
21, 2003. http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/031121/d031121a.htm
22
Anonymous “Profile of the Sound Recording Industry.” Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2000.
http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/arts27.htm
23
Ogrodnik, Lucie. “Patterns in Cultural Consumption and Participation.” Statistics Canada’s Cultural
Statistics Program. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, December 2000. p. 41-43
24
Ibid. p. 46
25
Granatstein. Yankee. p. 177
26
Anonymous. “It’s Your Turn: Consultations on FTAA and WTO Negotiations.” Towards a Canadian
Position on Trade and Cultural Goods and Services, Discussion Paper. Ottawa: International Trade
Canada, May 1999. http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/discussion/culture-en.asp
27
Granatstein. Yankee p. 260
28
Ibid. p. 260
29
Knelman, Martin. “Talking to Americans Not What it Used to Be.” CBC Watch.
http://www.cbcwatch.ca/?q=node/view/790
30
van de Port, M. “On Mud and Gypsies, or On People and the World as They Simply Are.”Gypsies, Wars
and Other Instances of the Wild. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1998. 156
31
Duong, Quang. “Police Response was Brutal.” The Review. Vancouver: Richmond Public Library, July
5, 2003. http://www.yourlibrary.ca/community/richmondreview/archive/RR20030710/yourview.html
32
Anonymous. “Rioters Pitch Beer Bottles at RCMP.” The Province. Vancouver: CanWest Interactive Inc.,
Thursday, July 3rd 2003. http://www.geocities.com/insurrectionary_anarchists/canadadayriot.html
33
Ipsos-Reid. “March 21st, International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.” Ipsos News
Centre. Toronto: Ipsos Group, March 21, 2005. p. 1
34
Anonymous. “Citizenship Exam Survey.” p. 1
35
Morissette, Rene et al. “The Evolution of Wealth Inequity in Canda, 1984-1999.” Business and Labour
Market Analysis. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, November 2003. p. 10
http://econwpa.wustl.edu/eps/mic/papers/0401/0401004.pdf
36
Dale, Stephen. Lost in the Suburbs: A Political Travelogue. Toronto: Stoddart Publishing Co. Ltd., 1999.
p. 1-26.
21
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baker, Chris. “Political Illiteracy Bodes Ill for Reform.” Environics Research Group. Winnipeg: Winnipeg
Free Press, Thursday, November 7th, 2002. http://erg.environics.net/news/default.asp?aID=502 Date
Accessed: 12/03/05
Baker, Chris & Jack Jedwab. “Patriotism and Canadian Identity.” Environics Research Group &
Association for Canadian Studies. Monday, May 26, 2003. p.1-4
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:TLmywgggpgQJ:www.acsaec.ca/Polls/Poll40.pdf+number+of+canadians+who+have+canadian+flags&hl=en Date Accessed:
21/03/05
Barth, Fredrik. “Introduction.” Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. Boston: Little Brown and Co. p. 55
Clarke, George Elliot. “White Like Canada.” Transition, No. 73. Durham: Duke University Press, 1997. p.
98-109.
Dale, Stephen. Lost in the Suburbs: A Political Travelogue. Toronto: Stoddart Publishing Co. Ltd., 1999. p.
3-350.
Duong, Quang. “Police Response was Brutal.” The Review. Vancouver: Richmond Public Library, July 5,
2003. http://www.yourlibrary.ca/community/richmondreview/archive/RR20030710/yourview.html Date
Accessed: 26/03/05
Ferguson, Will. “Great Canadian Quotes.” Ed. Curtis Sanderson. Toronto: Canada4Life.ca 2005.
http://www.canada4life.ca/quotes.php Date Accessed: 21/03/05
Flint, John E. “Reflections on British Imperial and Canadian History.” Canadian Journal of African Studies
Vol. 15, No. 1. Toronto: Canadian Association of African Studies, 1981 p. 51-54
GDSourcing.com. “Canadian Internet Stats Pack.” Toronto: Ispos-Reid Canada, 2005.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:226biCJX554J:www.gdsourcing.ca/StatsPack2.pdf+marketing+repo
rts+use+of+canadian+patriotism&hl=en Date Accessed: 18/03/05
Granatstein, J.L. Yankee Go Home? Canadians and Anti-Americanism. Toronto: HarperCollins Publishers
Ltd, 1996. p. ix-317
Innis, Harold. “Conclusion from the Fur Trade in Canada.” A Passion for Identity: An Introduction to
Canadian Studies, Third Edition. Ed. David Taras & Beverly Rasporich. Toronto: ITP Nelson, 1997. p. 1526
Ipsos-Reid. “March 21st, International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.” Ipsos News
Centre. Toronto: Ipsos Group, March 21, 2005. p. 1-9
Knelman, Martin. “Talking to Americans Not What it Used to Be.” CBC Watch.
http://www.cbcwatch.ca/?q=node/view/790 Date Accessed: 12/03/05
McArthur, Keith. “Iconic Line ‘I am Canadian’ Put on Ice.” The Globe & Mail. Toronto: Bell Globalmedia
Publishing Inc., March 15 2005.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20050315/RMOLSON15/TPBusiness
/Canadian Date Accessed: 18/03/05
Morissette, Rene et al. “The Evolution of Wealth Inequity in Canda, 1984-1999.” Business and Labour
Market Analysis. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, November 2003. p. 1-76
http://econwpa.wustl.edu/eps/mic/papers/0401/0401004.pdf Date Accessed: 18/03/05
Naroll, Raoul. “On Ethnic Unti Classification.” Current Anthropology, Vol 5(4). Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press, October 1964. p. 283-311
Ogrodnik, Lucie. “Patterns in Cultural Consumption and Participation.” Statistics Canada’s Cultural
Statistics Program. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, December 2000. p. 1-64
Scholte, Jan Aart. “Globalization and Community.” Globalization: A Critical Introduction. New York, NY:
Palgrave, 2000. p. vii-361
Slam Sports. “CBC’s Game 7 Broadcast Draws 2.589M viewers.” Toronto: Canoe Inc, June 10, 2003.
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam030610/nhl_ananj1-ap.html Date Accessed: 6/03/05
Taras, David. “Introduction: The Crisis of Canadian Identity.” A Passion for Identity: An Introduction to
Canadian Studies, Third Edition. Ed. David Taras & Beverly Rasporich. Toronto: ITP Nelson, 1997. p. vii503
van de Port, M. “On Mud and Gypsies, or On People and the World as They Simply Are.”Gypsies, Wars
and Other Instances of the Wild. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1998. p. 133-175
Anonymous. “About Velocity.” Velocity Fresh Canadian Clothing: Canadian Clothing.ca, 2005.
http://www.canadianclothing.ca/aboutvelocity.html Date Accessed: 17/03/05
Anonymous. “Citizenship Exam Survey of 1997.” The Dominion Institute. Toronto: Angus Reid Group,
Inc, November 10, 1997. p. 1-17
Anonymous. “Enter our Store!” Allmaple Clothing: Allmaple Clothing Co, 2004. http://www.allmaple.ca/
Date Accessed: 17/03/05
Anonymous. “It’s Your Turn: Consultations on FTAA and WTO Negotiations.” Towards a Canadian
Position on Trade and Cultural Goods and Services, Discussion Paper. Ottawa: International Trade
Canada, May 1999. http://www.dfait-maeci.gc.ca/tna-nac/discussion/culture-en.asp Date Accessed: 9/03/05
Anonymous. “Paul Martin’s Tall Agenda.” The Economist Vol. 368, No. 8384. London: The Economist
Newspaper Limited, September 27th, 2003. p. 35
Anonymous “Profile of the Sound Recording Industry.” Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 2000.
http://www.statcan.ca/english/Pgdb/arts27.htm Date Accessed: 28/03/05
Anonymous. “Rioters Pitch Beer Bottles at RCMP.” The Province. Vancouver: CanWest Interactive Inc.,
Thursday, July 3rd 2003. http://www.geocities.com/insurrectionary_anarchists/canadadayriot.html Date
Accessed: 26/03/05
Anonymous. “Television Viewing, Fall 2002.” The Daily. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, Friday November 21,
2003. http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/031121/d031121a.htm Date Accessed: 18/03/05