Canada's
growing up, so take constructive criticism
Recently,
I've been hearing a lot about Canada's image eroding in the eyes of
the world. Ours was a country of peacekeepers whose people were
loved worldwide because of our loving attitude, compassion and
tolerance. Now, they say, the new face of Canada isn't pretty,
people don't like us anymore.
Says
who? And why?
Most
of it comes from the British media, considered "influential" by some
when used to make domestic political points criticizing Prime
Minister Stephen Harper, or when trashing Canada's organizational
skills for the Vancouver Olympics.
As
far as I'm concerned, Canada has been one of the greatest countries
in the world and still is. The difference is now Canada is growing
and wants a place on its own in the international scene.
Until
a few decades ago, Canada was "owned" constitutionally by the
British and economically by the Americans. They were calling the
shots and we were jumping whenever they asked us to.
Things
are changing and, of course, some media in both countries don't like
it.
In
reality, Canada has not changed. We are just evolving to occupy our
well deserved place in the World. However, this independence has
some strings attached. Up until a few years ago, Canada was the
water boy to the United States and England but now we want to walk
the world on our own.
It
means that we are going to make our own decisions like deciding not
to go to Iraq and choosing Afghanistan instead.
This
ongoing process of maturing, however, also requires us to perform
some of the dirty work of war that before was the duty of the U.S.
and U.K. We make our own decisions but we have to live with them.
Yet
Canadians are still the same, tolerant and caring people just like
before. In fact, the so-called international criticism is hinging
around two elements: the precarious situation of our natives and the
seal hunt. Neither issue is new. Canada is not treating natives any
worse than before and seal hunting is part of our history.
The
difference is that now we are not operating under the wings of
London or Washington and that means the world expects us to do more.
Sometimes we can respond to those new demands like we have in Haiti.
Other times we can't like in Iraq or an increasing involvement in
Afghanistan.
Part
of the growing process is learning how to cope with outside
criticism. It doesn't mean that we have to ignore it wholesale.
Whenever we find it positive and constructive we should act
immediately to learn from it. However, when we believe that it's
unfair and unjustified, we can then choose to answer or to ignore
it. But in neither case should we give it more importance than it
deserves. The Economist, The Guardian and Stephen Colbert are
entitled to express their opinions but they are not the oracles of
the world. If they don't like what we do, of course we are sorry,
but they are not the institutions managing the truth of the world
and it doesn't necessarily mean that they are right and we are
wrong.
For
example the harsh criticism from most of the British media against
our Vancouver Olympics organization might even be legitimate. We
have to admit that not everything went the way it was supposed to.
However, at the same time, the presumptuous British media have
failed to realize that it is very hard to organize any Winter
Olympics without snow. And, considering that minor detail, I believe
that Canada is doing a very good job,
eh.
