National Issue

There was just recently a event that took place, regarding the stepping down of an MP from his party. The name of the MP is Michael Chong, he refused to accept the nation motion, citing a principle of unity. He went as far as saying, that he opposed ethnic nationalism. Whatever that means?

So I write this letter giving my opinion, it was to the National Post. It never made it into the paper even though I saw little opposing views to Michael’s position. There was a mention of it being nothing more than a symbolic move, with that I concur. But I felt he was espousing a deeper position.

This is the e-mail I sent:

The recent happening in parliament raises some important issues. Specifically where Mr. Michael Chong steps down. It seems rather ironic that here is a man who has obvious ethnic roots and yet he is dogmatically opposed to ethnic nationalism. To me it all seems to be related to dialectics-a argument that juxtaposes opposed or contradictory ideas, but yet he does not attempt a resolution, therefore he is really being argumentative. This is evident in that he is extreme in his position. He is actually wanting to uphold one culture over another: That I suppose is the Canadian culture. Given that Canada has a history of presiding over other ethnic groups, you would think the folly of such antics would be recognized immediately. However it is cited as being a principle, when in fact Canada is known for its multiculturalism. One does not have to be hard-line nationalist to uphold their ethnicity. In fact the issue here is one of respect and being democratic. The strongest Nations that have nations within, are nations that grant distinction and espouse unity. Two principles that go hand in hand and ultimately create a strong environment.

Canada is in a unique position, in that they have three founding people, First Nations, French and British. Ethnic nationalism is to in fact exalt one people over other people. So if Canada is about exalting on cultural way over others, without first giving due process of respect, than the very thing that is wanting to be avoided is in fact being put in place. Unity can not come until respect comes.

However on the other hand, in terms of respect; if I give respect, am I not working on the larger picture? Indeed a united Canada should be our goal, but that will never come until we exercise some respect. Therefore such a initiative of recognition should be applauded, not opposed. Harper is right in doing what he did.

My e-mail has been modified to be made more clear, but for the most part it is what I initially wrote. Historically, putting a culture and way of life over others has been for the most part something that occurred in many parts of the world. But it is something that is not readily accepted today, in fact it goes without saying such tactics are reminiscent of past dictation’s of control and exclusion. The old premise of nation building being a sort of justification is an old, archaic discourse that outlived its purpose. It is time for other nations to rise and bring strength to our country. It is not relinquishing or losing power but gaining extra hands to do the job. Many of the problems lie with minorities, and if the future is going to see a rise in their populations, they may just need to be included. Any plan that is different, will add and give rise to problems that can be for the most part avoided.