Biography of Mel Hurtig
Mel Hurtig was a Canadian nationalist with very strong pro-Canada feelings. He felt that our government was selling us out. That our government was simply trying to
turn us into the fifty first state of the United states. In his book At Twighlight in the Country, he shares many of these views. He fought very valiantly against the free trade agreement, speaking out against it whenever possible. Urging government leaders to reconsider what we were giving the United States and what little we would be receiving in return. He also continually spoke out about how our culture continued to disappear and become more like that of the United States. How soon our culture could be undistinguished from our southern neighbors. He completely believed that we simply sold out our country and the politicians should be ashamed.
One of Mel Hurtig's mentors was George Grant. Foresaw the selling out of Canada and spoke about in his book Lament for a Nation which was published in 1965. He said as Mel quotes him in his own book:
Canada has ceased to be a nation, but its formal political existence will not end quickly. Our social and economic blending into the American empire will continue apace, but political union will probably be delayed. (p. 434)
Grant foresaw what Mel would begin to see and greatly foreshadowed exactly what would happen in Canada. Grant felt that the wealthy, the ruling classes, Liberal party and the elite of Montreal and Toronto, were responsible for selling out of Canada. Mel shared these views and especially later in life the views of the liberal party which he had previously been
Mel Hurtig
3
a part of. Later these views carried on to the Mulroney led conservatives who in M...
... middle of paper ...
...ill fairly unsuccessful causing Mel to consider starting his own political party the Nationalist Party of Canada.
The Nationalist party was a good idea but it failed because of an political infighting. The party was formed and ran for office after just eleven months in existence. After a successful first campaign political infighting with a rival forced Mel to disband the party. The ideology behind the party was quite good with their nationalist policies and their wish to end NAFTA and focus more on Canadian interests.
Mel Hurtig was a nationalist who was not afraid to speak his mind and to fight for what he believes in. Mel was not afraid to stand up against people, like Prime Ministers, when he knew he was right. By standing up for what he believed and for what was right for Canada Mel Hurtig is a Canadian hero who should be in charge of running Canada.
Louis St. Laurent managed to prevent the government and cabinet from collapsing, during one of Canada’s largest crises. He also helped assert Canada’s independence, by separating the influence of American culture, and providing more Canadian tradition. As well as succeeded in convincing Newfoundland to join confederation, after it failed to do so many times before. Overall there were many challenges to face during Louis St. Laurent’s years as a politician, however in the end he managed to maintain himself, succeeded in achieving many great accomplishments, and even created many historical moments for Canada along the way.
3 Wade. Mason. Search for a Nation. The Bryant press Limited, Toronto. 1967 [4] Canadians and Conflicts.
“Just watch me.”Joseph Philippe Pierre Yves Elliott Trudeau said in 1970. He meant it as he fought to keep Quebec a part of Canada. Not only did he do that, he managed to be prime minister for 16 years, as well as being Canada’s youngest leader at the time. He brought greater civil rights to Canadians, Quebec citizens mainly. His charismatic personality matched his innovative ideas, that enhanced Canada for the better. For his entire political career, not only did Canada watch him, the whole world watched him change the country for the better. He made a radical change to Canada by championing the idea of officially implementing bilingualism. Trudeau was a trailblazer from the moment he was elected.
Pierre Elliot Trudeau was arguably one of the most vivacious and charismatic Prime Ministers Canada has ever seen. He wore capes, dated celebrities and always wore a red rose boutonniere. He looked like a superhero, and often acted like one too. Some of the landmark occurrences in Canadian history all happened during the Trudeau era, such as patriating the constitution, creating the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the 1980 Quebec Referendum. However, it is Trudeau’s 1969 “white paper” and the Calder legal challenge which many consider to be one of his most influential contributions to Canadian history.
In conclusion, Pearson strengthened Canadian nationalism, promoted equality that is now an integral part to the Canadian identity, and he introduced several important social programs that continue to support Canadians. The ongoing benefits to Canadians from his contributions make him the most significant post WWII Prime Minister of Canada. Without the leadership of this influential Canadian, Canada would not be as strong a nation as it is today.
In the year 1957, Canada elected its first Prime minister without English or French root, John Diefenbaker. While growing up in the city of Toronto, because of his German name, he was often teased. [1] He grew up as an outcast, and so he was able to relate to the discrimination and inequality many of the minorities in Canada felt. This essay will attempt to answer the question: To what extent did Prime Minister John Diefenbaker help promote equality to the minority communities. . The minorities in this time period were the women, aboriginals, and immigrants. During his time as the Prime Minister, he was able to help protect the rights of this group because many of their rights were being abused by the society. Diefenbaker also helped the minorities to stand up for themselves and other groups. Diefenbaker was able to bring positive change to the minority communities by making an official Bill of Rights and appointing people of discriminated groups to the parliament while other members did not.
During the worst depression years in Canada, there were many people who tried tirelessly to get Canada out of the crisis she was in more quickly and efficiently. William Aberhart and his group of supporters had a plan that they were sure could help and even end the depression and its horrible effects. His theory was if a twenty-five dollar cheque was given monthly to each family, it would alleviate their financial fears and jumpstart the economy. Having confidence in his idea, he went to share it with both political parties. Unfortunately, both parties rejected the idea; saying money would only become more worthless. Even after running and being elected as Premier of Alberta, the resolution was not accepted because of the overwhelming responsibility towards the federal government.
The prime minister at that time, Mackenzie King, was unprepared to deal with the crisis at hand. His thoughts were that the depression was only a fluke, and that given time, the economy would prosper once more. King never answered the pleas for aid by his citizens, and told ...
Quebec has struggled with a need to be maitres chez nous “masters of their own house” (Young, 1998). Many attempts at resolving Quebec's issues has resulted in tensions from both sides. Because Quebec has a strong national identity, and do not define themselves as strictly Canadian, Quebec is seen as difficult, unyielding and discontented. Quebec's separation perhaps is inedible and the future of Canada questionable. Canada without Quebec will bring about many complications and whether there is a rest of Canada (ROC) after Quebec a major challenge. Western alienation and the lack of representation in federal affairs will be a factor; moreover, past actions and historical events may have turned Canada into a time bomb, and the deterioration of the provinces the only sulotion. How First Ministers react to Quebec's sovereignty regarding economic factors, political structure, and constitutional issues will be of great importance. Whether emotional issues will play a major role in decision making is subjective; however, it is fair to say that it will be an emotionally charged event and it could either tear apart the ROC or fuse it together. Placing emphasis on investigating what keeps Canada together is perhaps the key to Canada's future, and salvaging a relationship with Quebec.
This change in mentality demonstrates how Riel is part of the living process of confederation. The unique relationship shared by Riel and the Canadian government also exists between Riel and the Métis. Previously, the Métis relied on Riel for his help in securing their rights and liberating them, going on to even ask him to go back to Canada during his exodus to Montana, in order to present a list of grievance to the Canadian government. This has changed today, where the province of Manitoba is self-reliant and the Métis people are able to garner support for their own causes. The changing situation of Riel’s treatment shows how as a result of the constantly changing process of confederation, we now treat him in a different way than we would have in the past. While Riel is a strong example of how confederation is very much a living process, Canadians and society today continues to influence Canada as much if not even more than the Founding Fathers did in the past. Even today, our feelings toward certain aspects of the government and confederation are still evolving and changing as we become more
Finally the most controversial request was for Quebec to receive a special status as a “distinct” society. Now it was near the end of the meeting, everyone was even more motivated by all that they had already achieved. This was true that Quebec was unlike any other province; technically they were distinct among the others. Although some Premiers felt uncomfortable giving one province a special status, they thought they had won so much already that it was not a big deal to just call them what they were; different. The problem with this clause is that Quebec took it as meaning the special status would give them advantages in court by ruling their distinctiveness makes them different than other Canadians. On the contrary, Mulroney did not intend for this to make them different than others in court, he meant it as just giving them the special status. Most Canadians at first were under the same impression as Mulroney, except Quebec.
Canada is a large country with a history of many people and cultures, both good, and bad. Louis Riel, one of the most controversial men in history, was not a hero; in fact he may have been the mere opposite. Riel, one of the most famous Metis leaders, is greatly viewed in the perspective of some, but he can also be viewed, as a true rebel, and someone who wasn’t a heroic Metis. Although Riel took part in joining Manitoba in the dominion of Canada, he also threatened the new dominion of Canada. Riel’s actions and decisions are very controversial, and although many regard his actions and decisions very highly, Riel did the opposite. Through the organization of the Riel rebellions, the executing of Thomas Scott, and going against the Canadian Government, Louis Riel was truly a rebel, who threatened the dominion of Canada.
The horrors of racial profiling during World War II had always seemed to be distant to many Canadians, yet Canada was home to several xenophobic policies that were a violation of many rights and freedoms. One of the cruelest instances of this was the Japanese Canadian internment. At the time, the government justified the internment by claiming that the Japanese Canadians were a threat to their national defense, but evidence suggests that it had nothing to do with security. The government made illogical decisions in response to the mass panic and agitation in British Columbia. To aggravate the situation, Prime Minister William Mackenzie King reacted passively to these decisions, as it was not in his best interests to be involved. Moreover,
Canada experienced the revolution of changing politics and new ideologies, it was a necessary wave
...n of their cabinet, while others may choose to create a new political path without consulting the views of their party. Mellon thinks that the Canadian government is under dictatorial scrutiny, whereas Barker contradicts this belief. The idea of a prime-ministerial government is certainly an over exaggeration of the current state of Canada. There are too many outside and inside forces that can control the powers the Prime Minister of Canada. Furthermore, there are several outside sources that indicate a good government in Canada. The United Nations annually places Canada at the top, or near the top of the list of the world’s best countries in which to live. These outcomes are not consistent with the idea of a one ruler power. Canada is not ruled by one person’s ideas, suggestions, and decisions, but by government approved and provincially manipulated decisions.