confusion

In comments here, a reader criticizes me for... well, I'm not sure for what. I need some help interpreting this one.
I should mention that you (L-Girl) are sounding more like a Canadian apologist than the radical progressive you claim to be. In fact, you sound an awful lot like the American "right wing, wing-nuts" you rail against regularly - only the Canadian version of them.

Nothing personal, but I say this (coming from the Left) because Canada doesn't need anymore of these types of people. We've become complacent, and self-congratulatory attitudes such as yours only complicates the matter. Yes I realize that its "better than the US" (even though in some respects it isn't), but you live in Canada now and unless you want to live life playing the comparison game, you're not serving anyone. In fact, its a slap in the face to people like me who see real injustices here faced by real, living people.
I'm looking at this observation seriously, not intending to hold it up for ridicule. I replied here, a little annoyed at a wide-ranging negative critique of my outlook, but mostly baffled. The more I read GaryStJ's comment, the less I understand it.

I can appreciate the idea that progressive Canadians want Canada to improve, not just be better than the US, but be the best it can be, period. That's as it should be. From my perspective, though, it's impossible not to compare the Canada with the US - the place I lived my entire life, save for the last 10.5 months. I know someone who's originally from Montreal, and has lived in Toronto for 10 years, and she still constantly compares the two cities. It seems reasonable that I would still be comparing the country of my origin and citizenship with my chosen country.

But maybe I'm not really understanding GaryStJ's complaint. What is a Canadian apologist? In what way do I "sound an awful lot like the American 'right wing, wing-nuts' you rail against regularly - only the Canadian version of them"?

Please opine. (And of course, be honest.)

UPDATE:

GaryStJ explained further in another comment:
I think the point I was driving at is that you seem to be well on your way down the slope to Canada fanboyism. And when I say it serves no one, I'm inlcuding yourself into that equation for what I think are obvious reasons.

Now, the case may well be that you are, in fact, a proponent of everything that is fundamentally "Canadian". You might, save for a few current events here and there, feel confident in the overall direction this country has taken in the past few decades.

There certainly is nothing wrong with this point of view, nor is there anything wrong with having these same feelings towards the US. But it does beg a question, namely, how does one who is so fundamentally opposed to the United States find themselves so fundamentally a proponent of Canada - so much so that one emigrates from the former to the latter - when any honest analysis of the macro-level direction of both countries reveals an almost indistinguishable destination.

More specfically, I'm left with a number of other questions. For instance, I wonder why you pass on a Republican invasion of the Middle East in favour of a Liberal invasion of the Middle East. I wonder why Canadian flag-waving jingoism is tastful while American flag-waving jingoism is ignorant. I wonder why you abhor a news agency which is interfered by government in practice (Fox) to one which is interfered by government in defintion (CBC). I wonder why you can justify a history of slavery, genocide and imperialism while not being able to justify a history of slavery, genocide and imperialism. I also wonder why you admire an immigration system which favours wealthy, educated immigrants over one which favours wealthy, educated immigrants. I think these are questions which deserve answers, and ones which I assume you've mulled over during the months you contemplated your choice to migrate.

I believe that one can emigrate legitimately from one to the other without answering these questions, but I think to do so without admitting that the choice was based on anything but aesthetics is intellectually dishonest.

I guess I should also say that I'm not holding anything against you or trying to sound cheeky. Its just that someone denoucning a place one day then holding its partner in crime on a pedestal the next puts me at a loss. Maybe you could clarify your position...
So that's a mouthful and a half. It's ignorant of what I've written for the past two years, ignorant of much history, and presumptuous of what I do believe. "I think to do so without admitting that the choice was based on anything but aesthetics is intellectually dishonest," is rude, judgemental and presumptuous: as if my own choices, for my own reasons, are not good enough, as if I am under some kind of obligation to explicate my choices to a Board of Intellectual Directors who will then pass judgement on my reasons for emigrating and declare me Honest or No. I mean, who the hell is GaryStJ to declare me intellectually dishonest?

However, since Gary bothered to write out all those questions, and since he's not a wingnut, I will rise to the challenge and do the best I can to answer at least most of them.

I think the point I was driving at is that you seem to be well on your way down the slope to Canada fanboyism. And when I say it serves no one, I'm inlcuding yourself into that equation for what I think are obvious reasons.

I am quite a fan of Canada. I admit that freely and proudly. I am also a fan of Bob Dylan, Charles Dickens and the city of Paris, France. All have made me very happy.

At the same time, Bob Dylan has recorded some terrible music, Dickens can sometimes be very dull, and I once contracted food poisoning in Paris. I still love them all. The analogy to my new country should be obvious.

Now, the case may well be that you are, in fact, a proponent of everything that is fundamentally "Canadian". You might, save for a few current events here and there, feel confident in the overall direction this country has taken in the past few decades.

So far, and if we're limiting the discussion to the last few decades, I can say, yes, I feel okay. Not perfect, because I'd rather see the country move even further left (for example, providing day care, a prescription drug plan and even dental benefits under the provincial health insurance). But as I haven't a clue if or how those things are possible, I'm content for now to simply observe, ask questions, and learn. If you've actually been reading this blog, you know I do that frequently. That's why wmtc readers rise to my defense: because you don't know what you're talking about.

There certainly is nothing wrong with this point of view, nor is there anything wrong with having these same feelings towards the US. But it does beg a question, namely, how does one who is so fundamentally opposed to the United States find themselves so fundamentally a proponent of Canada - so much so that one emigrates from the former to the latter - when any honest analysis of the macro-level direction of both countries reveals an almost indistinguishable destination.

Sorry, I don't even understand what this means.

More specfically, I'm left with a number of other questions.

These I'll take one at a time.

For instance, I wonder why you pass on a Republican invasion of the Middle East in favour of a Liberal invasion of the Middle East.

What Liberal invasion of the Middle East would that be? I frequently write of my opposition to the mission in Afghanistan. So if that's what you're referring to, you haven't read this blog very much, and therefore should not be judging me. If there's an invasion I'm not aware of, do fill me in. You'd be hard-pressed to find an invasion I support, or have ever supported.

I wonder why Canadian flag-waving jingoism is tastful while American flag-waving jingoism is ignorant.

I haven't seen any Canadian jingoism. Pride in country is not the same as "my country is always right".

The dictionary I have on hand here at work defines jingoism as "extreme nationalism characterized especially by a belligerent foreign policy; chauvinistic patriotism". I haven't seen this in Canada.

I wonder why you abhor a news agency which is interfered by government in practice (Fox) to one which is interfered by government in defintion (CBC).

Ah, where to start on this one. GaryStJ, have you watched much television news?

Fox broadcasts lies, uncorroborated rumour, government propaganda without disclosure, hate-mongering and bigotry, under the guise of "news". They care nothing about honesty, integrity or the quaint little rules of journalism that distinguish opinion from reporting. They adhere only to their right-wing agenda, they exist only in the service of that agenda, and to turn a neat profit while doing so.

CBC, to my knowledge, is publicly funded, something I approve of wholeheartedly. I think (my opinion here) it does a very good job of presenting most points of view, of providing context, and staying judgement-free, to the extent that such a thing is possible (with the understanding that it's not entirely possible to eliminate bias altogether).

Inasmuch as CBC has a bias, it seems to be a bias I approve of. That's called personal preference.

I wonder why you can justify a history of slavery, genocide and imperialism while not being able to justify a history of slavery, genocide and imperialism.

One, I don't justify any country's history. Almost every country on earth and all the ancient countries that came before us have a history of all three, either giving or receiving.

Two, Canada's history in this regard, relative to the United States, is (to quote a Canadian-American [Vietnam draft resister] who wrote me when I first started this blog) "less worse". I haven't studied Canadian history as extensively as I have US history, but I've studied both to some extent. When it comes to slavery, genocide and imperialism, these two countries are not on the same planet. Surely you must know that?

Three, the countries have dealt with their past transgressions in vastly different ways. To give one example, while First Nations people in Canada have serious issues that need to be taken seriously and addressed, and are legitimately angry that they have been repeatedly rebuffed, Native Americans in the US are absolutely invisible, except as providers of gambling. I have been stunned at the level of awareness of native issues in Canada, and of the constant reminders that Canada was founded by three nations.

Four, I can't emigrate to a country based on history. I can only emigrate based on what is.

I also wonder why you admire an immigration system which favours wealthy, educated immigrants over one which favours wealthy, educated immigrants.

Here, you are just plain misinformed.

Immigration policy in the US favours illegal immigrants to do the dirty work, and a large, poorly defined group of people from countries deemed acceptable, most of who are working-class or what is sometimes called lower middle class. Go to Queens, New York, to see for yourself. It's also extremely difficult to emigrate to the US.

Canada favours people who are employable, students, and people who need refuge from persecution. Canada wants immigrants who will contribute to Canadian society (what's wrong with that?) and also offers shelter from a large number of storms. It's fairly straightforward to emigrate to Canada. Although you cannot be completely impoverished (unless you are a refugee), you certainly do not have to be wealthy. Aren't I proof of that?

I would advise against arguing with me about immigration. I know a thing or two about it.

I think these are questions which deserve answers

I disagree, but I answered anyway.

and ones which I assume you've mulled over during the months you contemplated your choice to migrate.

You assume incorrectly. My reasons for leaving the United States for Canada are well documented in this blog. I certainly did not contemplate the ridiculous questions you listed above! Can you imagine a prospective immigrant saying to herself, hmm, Canada once had slavery, and the CBC is publicly funded, I'd better not move there...?

For more answers to GaryStJ's questions, see comments here and in the older post.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

not so fast

dipstick