When Americans Are Mean to Canadians
“Canada is a sweet country,” states Tucker Carlson, a well-known conservative commentator for the American television station CNN, in December 2005. “It is like your retarded cousin you see at Thanksgiving and sort of pat him on the head. You know, he's nice, but you don't take him seriously. That's Canada.” The year before, the same Carlson declared that essentially Canada is “a made-in-Taiwan version of the United States.” In doing so, did he summarize the American majority opinion with regard to Canada?
Chantal Allan, an English-Canadian journalist who now lives in Los Angeles, explores this question in “Bomb Canada! And Other Unkind Remarks in the American Media.” “Québec bashing,” or routine ridicule of Quebec from English-speaking Canada, is a well-known phenomenon. Quebec, Canadian or international forms of anti-Americanism have often been studied. Such is not the case, however, regarding “Canada bashing” or anti-Canadianism, a “hostile attitude opposed to the state of being Canadian,” found in the United States. Chantal Allan’s project is thus original and informative. American newspapers, such as The New York Times, The Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal, are Allan’s main sources in her project.
Old Sources of Friction
Frictions between Canada and the United States go back a long way. The Americans, explains Allan, never really forgave the Canadians for not supporting them in their revolt against Great Britain in 1776 and again in the War of 1812. Despite that, the relationship between the two countries has been stable ever since. The relations that they have developed between them are so close that “unbraiding them would threaten the security and prosperity of both nations.” Still, crises arise that jeopardize their neighborly relations.
The official independence of Canada in 1867 worried some American commentators. They feared that this constitutional monarchy would threaten the republican system of governance. In the Southern newspapers of those days, Canada was often described as “the coldest country in the world,” but nevertheless The Chicago Tribune suggested annexing it. The Fenians — Civil War veterans of Irish ancestry — even hoped to take Canada hostage and offer it to Great Britain in exchange for Irish independence. At that time, the already-large exodus of Canadians to the United States had some worried. “Canadians are honest and hardworking,” according to the Americans, “but somewhat primitive."
Negotiations for a reciprocity or free-exchange treaty in 1911 occurred at a time of strong Canadian-American relations. In the United States, some politicians suggested taking advantage of the situation to annex Canada. Conservative Canadians, on the other hand, opposed Laurier’s project because they believed it would lead to a rupture with Great Britain. The law was eventually passed by the Americans, but failed once Borden and the Conservatives won the election. “We did not think they would be so foolish,” wrote The New York Times, in reference to the Canadians.
The period from 1953 to 1968 was marked by the Cuban Revolution, the nuclear arms crisis on Canadian soil and the Vietnam War. In 1960, the Canadian refusal to respect the American embargo on exports to Cuba was considered by The Chicago Tribune to be a “perceived Judas move.” During the same period, the installation of nuclear arms on Canadian soil by the Americans led to controversy. The Liberal supporters of Pearson were in favor of such a move, while Conservative supporters of Diefenbaker were opposed. The Liberal victory in 1963 settled the matter in favor of the Americans. However, in pleading for a suspension of the airstrikes and asking for peaceful negotiations in Vietnam, Pearson enraged President Johnson, who allegedly grabbed Pearson by the collar and shouted, “You pissed on my rug.”
The Trudeau years left Americans skeptical. At first, they were fascinated by this prime minister, who was “Canada’s version of the Kennedys,” but the commentators quickly became disenchanted with him. They cited his “sympathy for socialist values” and feared his “Third Option,” which would lessen Canadian dependence on the United States. His “forceful response” to the October 1970 events was praised, but his close ties with the Cubans and Chinese were met rather aggressively. The election of Mulroney in 1984 pleased the anti-leftists in the South.
Post-September 11
Verbal hostilities resurfaced again in September 2001. Support from the Canadians following the attacks on the World Trade Center was appreciated, but this gratitude did not stop the spread of false rumors that the terrorists had entered the United States from Canada. When Chrétien refused to send Canadian troops to Iraq, Pat Buchanan, a former Republican candidate, spoke of “Soviet Canukistan.” Jonah Goldberg, another conservative commentator, referred to Canada as a “nation of cowards”* and jokingly, in poor taste à la Sarah Palin, suggested that a quick raid on Canada would force the nation to rearm itself. As a retort, Chrétien’s communications director called Bush a half-wit, and the Liberal deputy Carolyn Parrish expressed her frustration with “American bastards.” The right-wing American commentator, Ann Coulter, stated that she only hated Canadians … who were French-speaking!
To explain the excess of anti-Canadian remarks in the American media since 2001, Chantal Allan cites the proliferation of media networks and the accompanying increase of partisanship in the news, as well as the decrease of American correspondents in Canada and the resulting increase in ignorance about Canada. Chantal Allan shows the ridicule that stems from this ignorance, and in doing so, she wrote a book that is humorous, illustrative and preemptive.
*Editor’s Note: The above quote, correctly translated, could not be verified.
Chantal Allan, an English-Canadian journalist who now lives in Los Angeles, explores this question in “Bomb Canada! And Other Unkind Remarks in the American Media.” “Québec bashing,” or routine ridicule of Quebec from English-speaking Canada, is a well-known phenomenon. Quebec, Canadian or international forms of anti-Americanism have often been studied. Such is not the case, however, regarding “Canada bashing” or anti-Canadianism, a “hostile attitude opposed to the state of being Canadian,” found in the United States. Chantal Allan’s project is thus original and informative. American newspapers, such as The New York Times, The Chicago Tribune, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal, are Allan’s main sources in her project.
Old Sources of Friction
Frictions between Canada and the United States go back a long way. The Americans, explains Allan, never really forgave the Canadians for not supporting them in their revolt against Great Britain in 1776 and again in the War of 1812. Despite that, the relationship between the two countries has been stable ever since. The relations that they have developed between them are so close that “unbraiding them would threaten the security and prosperity of both nations.” Still, crises arise that jeopardize their neighborly relations.
The official independence of Canada in 1867 worried some American commentators. They feared that this constitutional monarchy would threaten the republican system of governance. In the Southern newspapers of those days, Canada was often described as “the coldest country in the world,” but nevertheless The Chicago Tribune suggested annexing it. The Fenians — Civil War veterans of Irish ancestry — even hoped to take Canada hostage and offer it to Great Britain in exchange for Irish independence. At that time, the already-large exodus of Canadians to the United States had some worried. “Canadians are honest and hardworking,” according to the Americans, “but somewhat primitive."
Negotiations for a reciprocity or free-exchange treaty in 1911 occurred at a time of strong Canadian-American relations. In the United States, some politicians suggested taking advantage of the situation to annex Canada. Conservative Canadians, on the other hand, opposed Laurier’s project because they believed it would lead to a rupture with Great Britain. The law was eventually passed by the Americans, but failed once Borden and the Conservatives won the election. “We did not think they would be so foolish,” wrote The New York Times, in reference to the Canadians.
The period from 1953 to 1968 was marked by the Cuban Revolution, the nuclear arms crisis on Canadian soil and the Vietnam War. In 1960, the Canadian refusal to respect the American embargo on exports to Cuba was considered by The Chicago Tribune to be a “perceived Judas move.” During the same period, the installation of nuclear arms on Canadian soil by the Americans led to controversy. The Liberal supporters of Pearson were in favor of such a move, while Conservative supporters of Diefenbaker were opposed. The Liberal victory in 1963 settled the matter in favor of the Americans. However, in pleading for a suspension of the airstrikes and asking for peaceful negotiations in Vietnam, Pearson enraged President Johnson, who allegedly grabbed Pearson by the collar and shouted, “You pissed on my rug.”
The Trudeau years left Americans skeptical. At first, they were fascinated by this prime minister, who was “Canada’s version of the Kennedys,” but the commentators quickly became disenchanted with him. They cited his “sympathy for socialist values” and feared his “Third Option,” which would lessen Canadian dependence on the United States. His “forceful response” to the October 1970 events was praised, but his close ties with the Cubans and Chinese were met rather aggressively. The election of Mulroney in 1984 pleased the anti-leftists in the South.
Post-September 11
Verbal hostilities resurfaced again in September 2001. Support from the Canadians following the attacks on the World Trade Center was appreciated, but this gratitude did not stop the spread of false rumors that the terrorists had entered the United States from Canada. When Chrétien refused to send Canadian troops to Iraq, Pat Buchanan, a former Republican candidate, spoke of “Soviet Canukistan.” Jonah Goldberg, another conservative commentator, referred to Canada as a “nation of cowards”* and jokingly, in poor taste à la Sarah Palin, suggested that a quick raid on Canada would force the nation to rearm itself. As a retort, Chrétien’s communications director called Bush a half-wit, and the Liberal deputy Carolyn Parrish expressed her frustration with “American bastards.” The right-wing American commentator, Ann Coulter, stated that she only hated Canadians … who were French-speaking!
To explain the excess of anti-Canadian remarks in the American media since 2001, Chantal Allan cites the proliferation of media networks and the accompanying increase of partisanship in the news, as well as the decrease of American correspondents in Canada and the resulting increase in ignorance about Canada. Chantal Allan shows the ridicule that stems from this ignorance, and in doing so, she wrote a book that is humorous, illustrative and preemptive.
*Editor’s Note: The above quote, correctly translated, could not be verified.
This is what Republicans think of Canada. Big difference.