Do Canadians fear that recognizing it as a societal issue will threaten Canada’s image as a utopian society? How do reparations from the government affect the victimized groups? Do they really benefit them or are they unnecessary? Do they make up for the damage that has already been done? Does intolerance within Canadian society develop due to the unwillingness of ethnic groups to assimilate to “Canadian” culture?
Quebec’s secession from Canada has been driven by many factors such as the provinces’s belief in a distinct identity, lack of representation in politics and the isolation of Quebec’s culture and language from the rest of Canada. These beliefs are valid but, realistically a secession from Canada will cause economic destruction within the province. It has been reported that the province of Quebec has little economic backing in trade to finance a legitimate government in international politics. Also, issues concerning international trade and negotiations will become difficult to deal with as economic stability will not be immediately guaranteed. In addition to that, all the chaos from these problems will inevitably lead to Quebec’s citizens
The United Nations is corrupt and due to this Canada does little or has no chance to contribute to the organization. The United Nations is a global organization that was created to prevent future wars, however, due to the peacekeeping missions, it has made it worse. Canada joining peacekeeping missions means
Both Alexander Mackenzie and John A. Macdonald contributed greatly to making Canada what it is today. However, due to being on opposing political parties, they both came up with completely opposite policies. First of all, while Mackenzie was seeking free trade with the USA, Macdonald implemented the National Policy. In addition, both Mackenzie and Macdonald had different intentions towards the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) project. Macdonald wanted to complete the CPR project, however, Mackenzie gave it no thought and immediately cancelled it.
In the Constitution, there is no mention for the freedom of press, assembly, religion, or speech. Since the listed freedoms are not mentioned in the Constitution, the government is free to exploit and violate them. Americans fought a war for the security of their fundamental rights, and they don’t want a constitution that would place those rights in danger of loss.The Federalists would say that a bill of rights is not needed because The Constitution is the ultimate protection of the people, and the people are the sovereigns. This can be countered by the fact that, in the Constitution, there is no mention of the freedom of religion speech, press, etc. National government is free to violate these
This belief put Trudeau at odds with both the vast majority of the organized labour groups and the NDP; both of whom wanted to limit individual rights to own property and, potentially, nationalize areas that the respective parties believed were too important to Canada’s economic, social, and political health to leave in private hands. While Trudeau was firmly against any notion of nationalizing private property, he was politically astute enough to not mention this during the Liberal minority period, as it would have likely give the NDP the reason they needed to bring down Trudeau’s government. Instead, Trudeau concentrated on the most important and longest-lasting, domestic policy during his entire period in office: multiculturalism as an
Technicalities are an issue that the world forgets again and again, because technically Canada is not an independent democracy. The Queen must sign off on every single piece of legislature that leaves Parliament, and since that would be impractical the Governor General represents the Queen and signs every bill. This means that without Royal ascent, no bill can become law in Canada. This is contradictory to the equality of other bodies of power. The very concept of democracy is contradictory to that of a monarchy, and technically Canada is still under the sovereignty of the
3) In my opinion, I think the Canadian government should not obligate to intervene in other countries when the rights and freedoms of Canadians are infringed because they cannot interfere in current legal proceedings in other countries unless it is requested to do so by local authorities. The legal procedures may be different from the procedures in the Canadian legal system. If the person is involved in these proceedings, the person may face long delays in the effort to resolve their case. If the person’s international human rights are known to have been violated, the Government of Canada can try to put pressure on the foreign authorities to stand for their international human rights obligations and provide the person some protection. In addition, while having dual citizenship is
As for the steps Canada should take, they should continue to bring awareness to the harm cultural appropriation has towards Indigenous people. It is usually not a conscious decision for people to wake up and intentionally try to appropriate another culture. However, many people are unaware of the disrespect and theft it really brings because it is sometimes difficult to picture yourself in another person’s shoes, as Canada is such a privileged country. There should be stronger enhanced laws to protect Indigenous art and culture,because so many pieces are being illegally sold to the public without any credit. It’s easy for artists to view this topic and argue that it is a freedom of expression, but in reality it is more so laziness and instead desiring a right to speak over historically silenced cultures.
As a result of increasing modernization and globalization, it is not uncommon for us to meet, study or work with people from different cultural background. To communicate successfully, understanding about and sympathizing for others’ differences is the key. Otherwise, misunderstanding and miscommunication would be inevitable, which can have adverse impacts in many situations such as studying and business setting. That is to say, intercultural communication competence is a must for anyone wishing to succeed in this highly globalized world. Thanks to its supreme importance, intercultural communication has been featured in multiple publicities, including video, songs or movies.
In addition, the Articles prohibited Congress from regulating commerce which meant inhibited foreign trade and a weak national economy. Therefore, the Constitution solved this problem by giving Congress the right to regulate interstate
Also, violators of the Stamp Act could be tried and convicted without juries in the vice-admiralty courts. So that means they could be tried without a jury in the court which was not fair. Also, the colonists started vehemently resisting. “They insisted that only their representative assemblies could levy direct, internal taxes, such as the one imposed by the Stamp Act. They rejected the British government 's argument that all British subjects enjoyed virtual representation in Parliament, even if they could not vote for member of the Parliament.” This means that the colonists did not enjoy the Parliament so they rejected Britain 's argument because they did not agree with it.
The conclusion of production left many of Canadians to fend for themselves, while the United States thrived with technology and innovation. In my opinion, it would be eye-opening for the Canadians to see their masterpeice not being able to soar in Canada, as it would somewhere else. It is eye-opening for Canada 's political and economic state to see them coming so far as a country, in an innovation that could have greatly surpassed anything in its time, not be possible. This was a realization that it is difficult for a "country the size of Canada to compete in the business of building costly weapons of war." And even to this day, it is hard for Canadians not to blame the United States for the destruction of the Arrow.
The Indian Act is a part of Canadian legislation that is intended to elucidate how the federal government handles its responsibilities to the Aboriginal population of Canada. The Indian Act was created to civilize, protect and assimilate the Aboriginal people; however, in the past the Canadian government perceived Aboriginal people as wards, and thought that the Native communities and governments were unqualified of running their affairs (Coates, 2008). In the past the Indian Act was also utilized as an instrument to limit rights of the Aboriginal population. It banned Aboriginal people from practicing their cultural practices, denied them the right to vote, controlled who was permitted to travel from reserve settings, and decided where
Levying taxes was a much needed change to the Articles of Confederation. The idea of relying on individual states to offer a certain amount of taxes, without consequence to those who did not, was ludicrous. The Government was left unable to pay its foreign debtors which caused concern with those worried