There are a numerous amount of people in the country of Canada in general agreement that the citizens should fulfill a duty to the country. Many Canadians debate on whether this duty includes putting yourself at risk to die for the country. The subject is a very grey area with many differing stances and potential ways of approaching it. The debate between dying for one’s country and not can be quite a splitting topic. One’s allegiance to the country could possibly be questioned by some if they were to answer that they wouldn’t die for their country. It doesn’t necessarily mean that they are against the interests of the country, but for example, you wouldn’t vote for a prime minister/president who is not willing to die for his/her country. I disagree with the notion that one of the duties of Canadians would be to risk your life for the country, and I think there are alternatives to fulfill responsibilities for the country. Under no circumstances would I risk my life for the sake of the country. …show more content…
It certainly is an outstanding selfless act to be able to sacrifice your entire being for the sake of something you believe in, but I think this specific reason for doing so is solely for those who are religious. If you value your life and potential experiences of life more than your nationalistic tendencies for your country, then you wouldn’t risk the chance of death for the benefit of the country. For instance, those who align themselves with nihilism believe that there is no meaning to life, which adds to their justification to not die for
Nationalism is defined as love of your country. The basis for Canada’s national love of country is focused around three main ideas; devotion, sacrifice and willingness to die. These characteristics are displayed in the play Billy Bishop Goes to War. Thousands of young men were shipped off to war with these three great qualities. Billy Bishop was among those thousands and was an outstanding World War One pilot who displayed the three key qualities that our national love is based upon throughout the play. Being willing to do anything to protect our country and its freedom is nationalism.
The War Measures Act was a law passed in 1914 by the Canadian Government in Canada during WWI, amongst many others that the government had passed that allowed the government to take control of communications, establish censorship of transatlantic cables, and organize the militia (Bolotta, Angelo et al. 39). The War Measures Act itself allowed the government to: censor and suppress publications, writing, maps, plans, photographs, communications, and means of communication, arrest, detain, exclude, and deport persons, control harbours, ports, and territorial waters of Canada and the movements of vessels, control the transport of persons and things by land, air, or water control trade, production, and manufacturing, and appropriate and dispose of property and of the use thereof (Bolotta, Angelo et al. 39). It gave the government emergency powers “allowing it to govern by decree” while Canada was in war (War). In World War I (1914-1920), it had been used to imprison those who were of German, Ukrainian, and Slavic decent, and was used in the same way again in WWII (1939-1945) to imprison Japanese-Canadians, and to seize all of their belongings. They were then relocated into internment camps and concentration camps (Bolotta, Angelo et al. 171). Both times, those that were persecuted did not have the right to object (War). Those these laws had been created for the purpose of protecting Canadians from threats or wars for security, defense, peace order and welfare of Canada it instead greatly limited the rights and freedoms of Canadian citizens and debasing immigrants of enemy countries both in WWI and WWII (Bolotta, Angelo et. Al 39).
As the world goes to show you, there is and always will be hostility, violence, and disputes amongst people and nations. To be able to create peace in the world and to prevent war from breaking out, peace keeping missions are to be carried out and good relations are upheld with other countries. The Suez Canal Crisis was and urgent matter which arose in the 1950’s in which Canada established a key role in resolving and negotiating. Lester B. Pearson prevented any hasty actions from being made by the UN and other countries, Canada played a major role in both creating and contributing to making the United Nations Emergency Force, Canadians worked hard to restore Egypt to its former glory after the crisis had passed. Lester Pearson worked endlessly to promote the United Nations Emergency Force.
Peacekeeping has played a significant role in defining and shaping the country that Canada is today. Canada’s role used to be viewed by many as insufficient in the major issues which regarded the traditional powers of the world. Later on Canada began to establish some forms of credibility as they were fighting for a common good of the world’s nations and not just their allies. Recently since the year 1995 the role that Canada plays in the united nations peacekeeping efforts has significantly dropped, a large part of this was as a result of UN military missions through NATO as opposed to strictly just the UN. Due to this the role that this country has played in peacekeeping missions has decreased significantly compared to what it used to be.
...ore that 100 at this moment who have been deployed. At the end Canada has help all around the world to bring justice, and aid to those in need. Canada it’s seen as a peaceful nation and it has earn that title for all this work, and perseverance to make a better world by helping other nations with all this peace keeping missions.
Different states have various ways of ruling and governing their political community. The way states rule reflects upon the political community and the extent of positive and negative liberty available to their citizens. Canada has come a long way to establishing successful rights and freedoms and is able to do so due to the consideration of the people. These rights and freedoms are illustrated through negative and positive liberties; negative liberty is “freedom from” and positive liberty is “freedom to”. A democracy, which is the style of governing utilized by Canada is one that is governed more so by the citizens and a state is a political community that is self-governing which establishes rules that are binding. The ‘Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms’ allow Canada’s population to live a free and secure life. This is demonstrated through the fundamental freedoms, which permit the people to freely express themselves and believe in what they choose. Canadians also have democratic rights authorizing society to have the right to democracy and vote for the members of the House of Commons, considering the fact that the House of Commons establishes the laws which ultimately influence their lifestyle. The tools that are used to function a democratic society such as this are, mobility, legal and equality rights, which are what give Canadians the luxury of living life secured with freedom and unity. Furthermore it is safe to argue that ‘The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms’, proves the exceeding level of efficiency that is provided for Canadians in comparison to other countries where major freedoms are stripped from their political community.
Which in turn, created a whole new set of problems or rather anxieties for Canada due to the fact that now, “[The United States] are now the primary market and source of investment for Canadian commerce” (Bow, p. 346). Now instead of the essence of the threat being a physical invasion of the United States, Anti-Americanism in this time period derived from a threat of economic and cultural assimilation. Canada throughout this time period continues to find ways in order to separate themselves from their Western counter-parts. This was especially evident during the 1960s where, “the social and political turbulence… provoked a new wave of liberal anti-Americanism in Canada, focusing on a supposedly endemic pattern of racial conflict, urban violence, cultural polarization and political corruption” (Bow, p. 346). Due to those issues in the United States the sentiment has been more social among its people and it shows with different implementations of policies that Canada has placed or tried to place in order to separate themselves and as a country make themselves look better than the “super powered” United States by comparison. As a result, Canada became to be “proponents of universal health care, national welfare and pension programs and post war social programs…” (Bow, p. 347). The sentiment would evolved further due to the issues regarding the Vietnam war, which not only created a perception that, “America is by nature inclined to an aggressive self destructive foreign policy” (Bow, p. 348), but also is the “first Cold war crisis in which Canada chose to stand apart from the United States, and this affected not only Canadian diplomats’ capacity to influence U.S. decisions, but also Canadian public perceptions of what the war said about American values and priorities” (Bow, p. 348). During the Vietnam war the U.S were mostly criticized for acting
Canada is a society built on the promise of democracy; democracy being defined as “government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them or by their elected agents under a free electoral system.” In order to operate at full potential, the people of Canada must voice their opinions and participate fully in the political system. This is why it’s shocking to see that people are becoming less engaged in politics and the voter turnout has steadily been declining over the last 20 years. This lack of participation by Canadians is creating a government that is influenced by fewer people, which is detrimental to the democratic system Canada is built on.
According to Keeping and Shapiro, “The term ‘global citizenship’ is increasingly heard, especially in Canada, but rarely defined.”(as citied in Block and Friesen, 2012, page 215) I believe if a person who would like to place their own identity with a global community through actions much more than their identity about values and practices, they will become a part of global citizenship. After learning in ELLA 0360 textbooks, there are three people that stand out. They are Dr. Christopher Opio, Lindsay Willms and David Suzuki.
Many people and nations around the world are deprived of human rights. The government in the countries or nations usually can not help the people being deprived. Either because the government is too poor to, it is not one of the things the government is looking into, or the government does not know or care. Because of this certain people, or even whole populations are denied human rights and their living conditions and way of life are usually not on the positive side of things. There are many wealthier countries trying to help but sometimes that is not enough. To what extent should Canada have a role in working to increase human rights protection in other nations?
... and in doing so represent their country even more. Trying to be patriotic becomes hard for Brinker when his father wants him not to embarrass himself and do more for the country because Brinker feels that his father doesn?t understand that he is afraid to go to war. Brinker says", He and his crowd are responsible for it and we're going to fight it " (190). This quote shows how agitated Brinker is with his father for trying to tell him to accomplish more in a dangerous war, that Brinker wants nothing to do with, that can possibly lead to his own death. To sum up, patriotism is a necessity in going to war and representing the country because it shows feelings from the fighter to his or her country.
Canada has had a long and storied history especially in the 20th century. A key part of this history is Canada’s road to autonomy. The first step on this road is Canada’s role in fighting and ending World War I. The second step is Canadian involvement in the United Nations’ early days to the mid 1950’s. The last step on the road to autonomy is the Constitution Act, 1982. These three moments in time form the backbone of Canada’s road to autonomy.
A century ago, Canada was under control by the British Empire. The battles we fought the treaties we signed and the disputes we solved all helped us gain independence from our mother country “Britain”. Canadians fought a long battle protecting others, and from these battles we gained our peaceful reputation and our independence from Britain. Canada became a nation on July, 1st 1867. Although we were an independent country, our affairs and treaties were all still signed by Britain. In the next years Canada would establish its own government, and lead its own affairs. Many important events led to Canada’s independence, one of the earliest signals that Canada wanted to establish autonomy was the Chanak affair of 1921. In addition the battle of Normandy, which occurred on June 6 1944, contributed to the autonomy of Canada. The Suez Canal Crisis, which took place in the year 1956, earned Canada a place in the media spotlight, displaying Canada as a peaceful country that deserves the right to be independent. One of the final steps that aided with Canada’s independence from Britain was the Canada Act of 1982. Independence from Britain steadily increased throughout the 20th century because of political decisions made in Canada.
The culture of Canada refers to the shared values, attitudes, standards, and beliefs that are a representative of Canada and Canadians throughout Canada's history, its culture has been influenced by American culture because of a shared language, proximity, television and migration between the two countries. Overtime, Canadian-American relations have helped develop Canada’s identity during the years 1945-1982; thus introducing changing social norms , media and entertainment. In support of this, due to the United States being approximately 9.25 times larger in population and having the dominant cultural and economic influence it played a vital role in establishing Canada’s identity. With Canada being its neighbour, naturally, the United States would influence their way of life upon Canada. In other words,
What are Canada’s motives for helping out Afghanistan? Who will benefit from Canada going to war in Afghanistan? These are some of the questions many people have. While Canada has many domestic problems of its own such as homelessness, poverty and increasing national debt, why should Canada