Tag Archives: Canada

Nation Maker 2 – Richard Gwyn

“He had no high cards, but he knew how to play almost any game.”

1868 onwards were tough times for John A Macdonald, the first prime minister of Canada. He would lose a national election for the first (and only) time; he would face accusations of corruption about railway construction; he would endure national division over the rebellion of Louis Riel. He would overcome all this, and be re-elected while establishing the RCMP, building a railway across Canada, expanding Canada from coast to coast, and as usual, going around being his witty and charismatic self.

Louis Riel is perhaps the best known figure from that period, now recognized as a symbol of Manitoba, but at the time he was seen in Ontario as a Metis rebel, while in Quebec he was seen as the victim of the abuse of English power. His demands for land for the Metis, and his armed rebellion against Canada, polarized the country and aroused strong feelings. In the end, he would be executed for treason and for many years forgotten about, but he remains a source of controversy today, though for different reasons. The treatment of the First Nations in the same area, and the execution of 8 of them in public without lawyers or translators, remains all but forgotten, however.

This is the second part of Gwyn’s John A Macdonald biography: I reviewed the first part here. In brief, the first part covers a younger John A and Canada’s Conferation, while the second is focused on the second half of John A’s life, the Canadian Pacific Railway, and Louis Riel. Though still good, I liked this one less than the last; Gwyn’s sympathy for and love of John A, though it serves him well in many respects, can feel apologist when it comes to the scandals surrounding the construction of the railway.

The thesis of the biography, if biographies are allowed to have theses, is that with no John A, there would have been no Canada. Without John A’s constant worry over the Americans, Canada would simply be America North. That may well be true, but in the same time period lies the roots of much more of modern Canada; French/English divisions, political corruption (definitely political corruption), and perhaps even why the Liberal party has done so well over Canada’s history. That, of course, is why reading history is interesting.

John A: The Man Who Made Us – Richard Gwyn

“Macdonald made us by making a confederation out of a disconnected, mutually suspicious collection of colonies, and by later magnifying this union into a continental-sized nation.”

This is part 1 of Gwyn’s classic biography of the first Prime Minister of Canada, John A MacDonald; part 2 is on my shelf, so I imagine a review of that will appear in time. For non-Canadians reading, I provide this interesting fact: The Wealth of Nations was published in 1776, the year of the American Revolution, while Das Kapital (Pt 1) was published in 1867, the year of Canadian Confederation.

A worry of mine with biographies is that they can sometimes feel like they’re trying to cut the subject down to size. A key role of biographies is to explore the weaknesses as well as the strengths of an individual, but to try to insult Napoleon’s strategic sense, for example, seems to me to reveal more about the biographer than the biographee.

Fortunately, Gwyn’s biography of John A Macdonald does none of that. Instead, it is an insightful, well researched analysis of a great man who is often considered one of the Fathers of Canada, but was also a raging alcoholic, happy to distribute appointments to his friends and to buy support, and at best mediocre father of his actual child. My only criticism is that for an international reader, it might feel too Canadian in its focus, but as a biography written for a Canadian audience, that’s hardly a surprise.

It explores themes both large and small: from how the origins of Canada lie with the first alliance between French and English politicians, which John A would wholeheartedly adopt, to how he appears to have coined the word Shero for a female hero. It also studies John A himself, arguing his greatest strength was his practicality, in contrast to Lincoln’s idealism, which allowed John A to understand the lives of the people of Canada as they were actually lived.

Summarizing the history of Canada in a blog post is a bit beyond my brief, and so instead of attempting to do so I’d say for those interested in Canadian history and even world history of the time (John A traveled frequently to the UK for political reasons, and as a contemporary of Lincoln the book also takes on the Civil War, though from a Canadian perspective), the book is an exciting read. For those of us who experienced high school Canadian history, which seemed to suggest that the only thing that happened in Canadian history was something about coureurs de bois, the book is almost required reading.

Plus, John A’s a fun guy! When accused of being drunk (he was – he repeatedly threw up in the House of Commons), he replied “Yes, but the people would prefer John A. drunk to George Brown sober.”

Who Killed Canadian History? – J.L. Granatstein

“[T]he achievements of the past, and even the failures of the years gone by, can be a source of strength to meet not only today’s challenges, but tomorrow’s, too.”

Yup, it’s another Canada post. In my defense, I do try to focus on the underlying themes of these books, but I grant they’re not interesting to everyone.

Granatstein disapproves of how history is taught in Canada, and I have a suspicion he feels that way about how history is taught in a lot of places. For him, history is about narrative and causality, about learning what happened in the past, and he worries that too much of history today is about exploring political themes like racism and sexism. He doesn’t disagree that those are important, of course, but argues they should be in politics classes, not history: history should include them, but not be limited to them.

In saying so, he’s not afraid to take a controversial stance. Social history, labour history, women’s history: all as equally important as political history, he says, but too often taught at the expense of political history. In practice those are the sorts of ideas that historians fight internecine wars over, and I suspect the knives were out for him when the book was released.

I don’t know what the right way to teach history is: one has only to look at textbooks in the West Bank to see how difficult it can be. Even an attempt to have each side write alternating pages of a textbook failed in that particular case, as the views of the two sides were so different as to be irreconcilable. As this blog may betray, however, I personally love history, and so definitely believe that knowing history is important in order to be a successful citizen of a democracy. Based on the polling data, it’s not clear North Americans (I haven’t seen data for anyone else) are learning any history at all, and so there is definitely room for improvement. As perhaps with all school subjects though, the challenge is finite hours and almost infinite subjects people think should be required. Assembling a common list appears to be almost as difficult as coming up with a common history.

While Canada Slept – Andrew Cohen

What’s the role of a foreign service in a world in which world leaders can just pick up a phone and call each other, or even send emails? Are they integral parts of a country’s presence, representing their interests and ideas at international conferences, summits, and meetings? Or a force of declining importance?

Though not actually about that question, While Canada Slept is influenced by it everywhere. The book laments a decline in the quality of Canada’s international presence, its military, its aid programs, and its diplomacy. To my reading, however, it begged the question of what the role of a foreign service today actually is.

In an increasingly globalized and small world, is there as large a role for representatives? Of course, there’s clearly some role for diplomats, on smaller issues or on subjects when the leaders either do not wish to speak in person, or should not. Still, is it possible to attract the top tier of talent to a profession where for any serious decision, you consult your boss in real time, thus stripping you of much of your autonomy? There is simply more oversight possible of diplomats than has been true historically, and with that may come a reduction in its appeal.

Does that mean foreign services are declining in importance? I doubt it. If anything, in a globalized world, countries have more interactions than ever, and having good representation is critical. I’m sure the foreign service will continue to get many applicants, too. Without the prestige and autonomy of the past, however, the foreign service may struggle to attract the talent it used to.

While Canada Slept is perhaps of importance largely to Canadians, focusing as it does on Canada’s role in the world and how it can best participate. Still, the questions beneath it are interesting ones, and if you find yourself interested in Canada’s role in the world, you can read further here (or in the UK or Canada).