In Westminster-style democracies, having a politically weak but symbolically powerful monarch as head of state has proven to be an effective barricade against populist agitators.
This Victoria Day, the usual suspects will denounce the holiday in the name of decolonization. But as long as Canada's existence is said to make the world a better place, we shouldn't bemoan how this country came to be.
The land that became Canada has been inhabited for thousands of years, but as part of Queen Victoria's empire, it only exists as a unified sea-to-sea nation. We owe nearly all of our political ideals and principles to Britain, whether through the actions of those who came to Canada from across the Atlantic or through the lasting influence of their ideas.
Let's start with her crown. Entire books have been written about the advantages offered by a constitutional monarchy rather than a republic. But a simple comparison of the resource-rich constitutional monarchies of Canada, Australia and New Zealand with the resource-rich republics of South Africa, India and Zimbabwe reveals which is better for guaranteeing human rights, democracy and stability. be able to. Not to mention prosperity.
In Westminster-style democracies, having a politically weak but symbolically powerful monarch as head of state has proven to be an effective barricade against populist agitators. To deny that this is a huge advantage for Canada is to indulge in cognitive dissonance.
Ordered freedom is our inheritance. Have we always lived according to this ideal? Of course, it's not, because perfection is a stupid standard. Yes, slaves existed in Canada, and Britain participated in the Atlantic slave trade. However, slavery was at odds with British ideals of freedom and was markedly different from slavery in continental Europe.
Who ended slavery? Britain did more to eradicate slavery than any other European country through decades of naval campaigns from 1808 to 1867. The Royal Navy's anti-slavery campaign completely paralyzed the Atlantic slave trade, dwarfing even the efforts of Abraham Lincoln. American Civil War.
We forget that “anti-colonialism” was once a cry for more of this legacy, not less.
When there were anti-colonial movements at the height of the British Empire, it was not because leaders challenged British moral and political principles, but because colonial administrators withheld them.
Take Nova Scotia in the 19th century, for example. Their political struggle to end arbitrary colonial rule and bring about responsible government was never against Britain. In the words of their leader Joseph Howe: “I wish to live and die a British subject, but not a British subject in name only.”
Other great Canadian reformers of the time, such as Robert Baldwin and Louis-Hippolyte Lafontaine, simply wanted to enjoy the same rights as people living in Britain, and did not want their homelands to be completely separated from Britain itself. I didn't want it.
Australia and New Zealand, fellow former colonies, have similar attitudes and expectations of their governments for the same reasons, and have enjoyed stable and peaceful histories since independence.
This cannot be said of the former Spanish Empire in South America or the former French territories of Algeria and Vietnam. With a few exceptions, the former Spanish and French empires are rife with authoritarianism, cults of personality, republican dictatorships, and political violence.
This reality was understood by the world's most successful decolonized leaders as the age of empire declined in the 20th century. Lee Kuan Yew and Jawaharlal Nehru, Singapore and India respectively, understood that it was not necessary to erase all traces of British colonial rule for the newly independent states to prosper. Indeed, when Mr. Yu died in 2015, a reporter for Singapore's Straits Times wrote that Mr. Yu “believed that the best example of a safe country is one that does not run away from history.” .
Canada was not a British colony for long. The country is a modern, independent nation with its own unique characteristics, debates, and challenges. Nevertheless, we cannot deny that our expectations, sensitivities and attitudes stem from being part of the British Empire.
Taken to its logical conclusion, decolonizing Canada would mean erasing everything given to it by Britain.
The French do not hesitate to claim their Gallic heritage, and the Italians do not hesitate to value their Roman heritage. Victoria Day should be an annual reminder of our rich heritage as Canadians, not the least of which is our heritage as Anglo-North Americans.
Truly, without Queen Victoria's Britain, we would never have recognized Canada.
Jeff Russ is a fellow at the Aristotle Foundation for Public Policy, an author, and a former journalist.
