tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post112793372712503126..comments2023-08-03T07:33:41.442-07:00Comments on Idealistic Pragmatist: Who's Canadian enough?Idealistic Pragmatisthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-1128444759091702092005-10-04T09:52:00.000-07:002005-10-04T09:52:00.000-07:00kurichina,Interesting -- that I hadn't heard. Alt...kurichina,<BR/><BR/>Interesting -- that I hadn't heard. Although there are plenty of people in Canada who also had a problem with it, as you can see from this very thread.<BR/><BR/>Kevin,<BR/><BR/>Multiculturalism isn't the same as multinationalism, but if a society takes multiculturalism seriously, then multinationalism is an inevitable occasional side effect of that, and I become deeply suspicious of a society's commitment to multiculturalism when it doesn't tolerate multinationalism. As far as believing we'd all be better off if nationalism were less prominent here as elsewhere goes, that's not quite what I'm saying here--although I do believe that, too.Idealistic Pragmatisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-1128100248916483462005-09-30T10:10:00.000-07:002005-09-30T10:10:00.000-07:00Kevin,If the GG's function is now entirely symboli...Kevin,<BR/><BR/>If the GG's function is now entirely symbolic, then that's more of a reason, not less of one, for her to be able to have multiple citizenships. What a better way to epitomize the multiculturalism and diversity of Canada than to stand as living proof that multiple citizenships <I>don't</I> automatically mean less loyalty to Canada?Idealistic Pragmatisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-1128019209695636852005-09-29T11:40:00.000-07:002005-09-29T11:40:00.000-07:00Kevin,Well, then why isn't it simply illegal (or a...Kevin,<BR/><BR/>Well, then why isn't it simply illegal (or at least expressly forbidden) for a Governor-General to have multiple citizenships? If it were so self-evident that multiple citizenships automatically meant a conflict of interest, you'd think it would be.<BR/><BR/>Also, have we forgotten what the Governor-General's role is? The reason the position exists at all is to have a stand-in for the Queen ... who herself has multiple citizenships. As Trevor said above, if <I>that</I> isn't a conflict of interest, I think we're hard-pressed to say that Jean's multiple citizenships automatically would have been.Idealistic Pragmatisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-1128007520308664252005-09-29T08:25:00.000-07:002005-09-29T08:25:00.000-07:00Jim,Citizenships mean different things to differen...Jim,<BR/><BR/>Citizenships mean different things to different people. It is clear to you, me, and certainly to Michaƫlle Jean that the Canadian Governor-General must have Canada as his or her first priority, and maintain primary loyalties to no other countries. If she says she *does* have Canada as her first priority, though, and *doesn't* maintain primary loyalties to any other countries, then who are you to tell her that no, she actually does? In a practical sense (rather than a purely ideological sense), whom would it have harmed for her to keep the second citizenship, whatever meaning that happens to have to her personally?Idealistic Pragmatisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18296481430598981678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-1127967540124944332005-09-28T21:19:00.000-07:002005-09-28T21:19:00.000-07:00Yes Bijoux,You've convinced me. Appearing in a do...Yes Bijoux,<BR/><BR/>You've convinced me. Appearing in a documentary with several former FLQ members who have renounced violence and paid their debt to society clearly makes Madame Jean unfit to breath the same air as "real Canadians" like you.<BR/><BR/>Just in case Bijoux's broken (and often anti-immigrant) record has anyone thinking that our new Governor General was somehow involved with the FLQ's terrorist activities I'll point out two things. <BR/><BR/>During the FLQ crisis our new Governor General was indeed in Quebec.<BR/><BR/>She was also 13.<BR/><BR/>I haven't forgotten what the FLQ did, but for me, it's enough that the only people more upset about this appointment than conservatives are separatists. I might not mind an actual former terrorist being GG if it worried the separatists this much. But someone who shared a bottle of wine with former terrorists (who have renounced violence) during the filming of a documentary decades after their crimes, and after they had paid their debt to society? No problem.<BR/><BR/>She may not be Bijoux's GG, but she is Stephen Harper's, and she makes Gilles Ducceppe very unhappy. That's enough for me.Lord Kitchener's Ownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08348376638620272991noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-1127952723961366382005-09-28T17:12:00.000-07:002005-09-28T17:12:00.000-07:00Now, I'm one of the objectors to the dual citizens...Now, I'm one of the objectors to the dual citizenship GG, and I'll tell you why.<BR/><BR/>I just don't believe that the Head of State (GG), the Head of Government (PM), nor, for that matter, the Leader of the Opposition, should hold citizenship with another country.<BR/><BR/>These three individuals, under our current form of government have a responsibility to authorize, direct the formation, or direct opposition to legislation. As long as they hold citizenship with another country, there is perceived (real or not) loyalties to that other country.<BR/><BR/>We expect cabinet ministers, judges and juries to excuse themselves when a conflict of interest occurs. The PM, the GG, should not come into an office with a potential conflict of interest - that foreign passport is a conflict of interest waiting to happen.<BR/><BR/>I have no problems with a person's origin, or the origin of their Canadian citizenship - a Canadian is a Canadian - and a dual Canadian is not less a Canadian. I will not excuse behaviour that suggest otherwise.<BR/><BR/>That all said, I fully support Ms. Jean - she'll do great.Jim (Progressive Right)https://www.blogger.com/profile/02023879211848227007noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12426618.post-1127937932295608382005-09-28T13:05:00.000-07:002005-09-28T13:05:00.000-07:00I agree. When I posted about the new GG 6 weeks a...I agree. When I posted about the new GG 6 weeks ago, a debate arose about her citizenship. I argued that the fact that she is swearing an oath of office to represent the Queen for Canada was sufficient to prove her dedication to this country. I believe I said that while she held this office, it effectively nullified her other citizenships as she swore and oath to specifically represent Canada for the Queen. I didn't think it was necessary for her to give up her citizenship and indeed I believe it is unfortunate that such pressure was but on her to do so.<BR/><BR/>At the end of the day, what has changed? She no longer has a piece of paper that says she is a citizen of France. Does that change her status as a Canadian or suddenly make her more qualified for the job? I would argue that it does not but rather a scary form of nationalism emerged for a moment and forced her to comply. It is worrisome that such feelings can appear when provoked. It makes me worry sometimes what's beneath the surface of the usually passive, polite, and tolerant Canadians.<BR/><BR/>One blogger called it a demon in Canada, I think they have a point.Progressive Maritimerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08324167275786533054noreply@blogger.com