Is Canada an Empire?

For a very long time I've wrestled with an idea that is probably so "out there" for most folks that I suspect that they will have a hard time understanding what I am talking about. Recent disturbing tendencies in politics seem to support my central thesis, and I think it's time I shared it with my readers. Is Canada a nation? Or is it an empire?

Being a philosopher of sorts, I need to follow standard operating procedure and offer some definitions first. Wikipedia currently defines it as follows:  "An empire is a sovereign state functioning as an aggregate of nations or people that are ruled over by an emperor or another kind of monarch. The territory and population of an empire is commonly of greater extent than the one of a kingdom." In contrast, it says:  "A nation is a stable community of people, formed on the basis of a common language, territory, economic life, ethnicity, or psychological make-up manifested in a common culture."

The first thing that should jump out and bite the reader on the nose is the fact that Canada clearly isn't a "nation" based on the above definition. That's because our population doesn't all speak the same language, the country is too big, and, arguably we don't all have a similar culture and economic reality.

To start with, not only is there the French/English divide, but to be fair there are lots and lots of First Nations' and immigrant languages commonly used in Canada.

Would a nation based on linguistic unity have signs like this?
Public Domain image by Taprobanus, c/o WikiCommons

When we get beyond language, we start talking about other issues. The fracture lines in our society would suggest a conflict in terms of territory and economic life. Consider the divide between Alberta's oil-based economy and central Canada's commitment to the emerging high-tech, sustainable world. Is it any wonder that the part of the country that makes most of its money selling especially dirty oil is at odds with the part that sells solar panels and wind turbines?  I could go on and cite other examples, but I hope I've made my point.

&&&&

It's easier to show that Canada's not really a nation in the same sense as European states like Germany and France, than it is to argue that that Canada is an empire. But bear with me and look at the definition I provided above.

It's trivially true that Canada has a sovereign:  Elizabeth Regina. But I think it's more useful to think of Canada as being ruled by an aristocracy which alienated Westerners like Stephen Harper call "the Laurentian Elite".  This is a very small group of families that act like a Canadian aristocracy that has ruled the nation for most of my life and long before. Think about the various party leaders we've had:  Pierre and Justin Trudeau, Paul Martin (son of Paul Joseph James Martin---an important cabinet member under four different Liberal Prime Ministers), Bob Ray (son of Saul Ray---career diplomat, brother of John A. Ray---assistant to Jean Chretien and a Director of Power Corp.) In Quebec we have the Johnson Family:  Daniel Johnson Sr. was premier with the Union National party, his son Pierre-Marc Johnson was premier with the Parti Quebecois, and, his other son Daniel Johnson Jr. was premier with the Liberals.   Without going into detail, suffice it to say that there are a small number of families that control politics in Canada and have done so for a long time.

The Laurentian Elite are not the only aristocratic group that has emerged in Canada. Preston Manning's---founder of the Reform Party---father was Ernest Manning, Premier of Alberta for 25 years. Rob and Doug Ford also grew out of a political dynasty. Their father Doug Ford Sr. was a wealthy businessman who sat as a Conservative MPP and groomed his children for a career in politics. The important point to consider is not that there are elites that dominate politics in Canada, but to admit that they exist and pay attention as they engage in conflicts to control the city, province, or, nation.

It's important not to get hung-up on the elite thing. I'd suggest that it's a necessary component to the creation of an empire, but not sufficient. The United States has elites too:  the Kennedys, the Bushes, and, the Clintons come to mind. But the continental USA doesn't function like an empire, but rather a nation. Consider, if you will, how zealously it protects the linguistic of monopoly of English---it would never mandate that all government services must be available in Spanish, for example. (The relationship of the US to other nations that it dominates is another issue, which is why even though people causally call America an "empire", what they are really talking about is another phenomenon: "neo-colonialism".)

&&&&

If the readers will indulge me a bit more, I'd like to suggest that why it is important to think about Canada as an empire instead of a nation. Among other things, I'd suggest that it explains why we have managed to avoid some of the worst tendencies of populism that have damaged electoral politics in the rest of the world.

Flag of the Austro-Hungarian Empire

The two classic examples of stable empires are the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman empires. In both of these societies a wide variety of different nationalities were able to live together more-or-less peaceably for a long period of time. I say "more or less" because there were periodic conflicts between ethnic groups that needed to be forcibly squelched by the central authority in order to preserve the peace. While there were horrible ethnic conflicts within these empires, their collapse did nothing but accelerate and make these conflicts worse. For example, the former Yugoslavian states were part of the Austro-Hungarian empire, and, the entire middle-East was controlled by the Ottomans.

If you know a little bit about Canadian history you can see similar forces at play. Lower Canada was created as a distinct society after the invasion and conquest of the French colony by General Wolf. The central point was that the British were willing to give Quebec the religious and cultural

Flag of the Ottoman Empire

independence that they wanted, so they refused to join in the American revolution. Similarly, key elements of the First Nations agreed to stick with the British in order to protect themselves from what they considered a much worse relationship with the hated Yankees. This initial three-way alliance was cemented further by the addition of American loyalist refugees who created Upper Canada. The War of 1812 cemented this four-way alliance between Imperial overlord, British settlers, Canadiens, and First Nations. When Canada moved on to achieving Dominion status the Laurentian Elite substituted for the agents of the British Crown, but the basic system continues to this day. Ottawa balances the different constituencies of immigrant, First Nations, settlers, and, Quebecois to prevent the emergence of the sort of angry nationalism that is plaguing Europe and the USA. This system is called "the mosaic" in Canada, but in actual fact in every other context in human history it is instead called "imperial". If you look back on human history it was never independent countries that were tolerant of cultural diversity, it was always empires. (Think back to ancient Rome and it's tolerance of religious diversity.)

&&&&

Okay, here comes the begging bowl. I suppose if you thought the "Back-Grounder" was crap you wouldn't be reading this. So I have to assume that you are getting some value out of it. (On-line writing doesn't even provide paper for lining a bird cage.) If you do see some value in independent media, I'd suggest that if you can, you really should consider ponying up some money to support it. The great thing is that it doesn't have to cost much. All you have to do is click on the "Patreon" button on the upper right hand side. (If you are using a smart phone to read this, just click on one of the times I've written "Patreon" in this paragraph.) Once you get on the Patreon page, look at the right and choose a tier. They start at $1/month, so unless you are really poor, you should be able to afford to support the blog. If you really, really hate using the Web to pay bills, you can write me a cheque care of "Bill Hulet" and mail it to "124-A Surrey Street East, Guelph, N1H 3P9".    

&&&&

Of course, this raises the next question. Will "the Empire of the Two Canadas" (eg:  "upper and lower Canada"---Ontario and Quebec) continue? Or will it fall apart like the Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman Empires? This isn't a trivial question, because recent populist parties have emerged and been elected in both Ontario and Quebec. These threaten the position of the "natural governing party" (the Liberals, who are the political front for the Laurentian elite.) This will make it harder for Ottawa to

Flag of the Empire of the Two Canadas?

balance the competing interests of the empire's constituent elements. For my part, I think that this would be a very  bad thing. Our world needs larger and larger structures to deal with the environmental, economic, and, social problems we face. If Canada breaks into different emerging cultures that fracture on ethnic, provincial, and, economic lines, we will be creating new conflicts at a time when we need to be forging a greater ability to act collectively.