Colonialism: Reckoning, balance required to cure cultural disease
Nova Scotians and all Canadians need to challenge any action by governments, institutions or organizations to justify expunging parts of our history — the good and not so good.
“The legacy of colonialism is not a simple one, but one of great complexity with contradictions - good things as well as bad.” - Chinua Achebe, Nigerian author of Things Fall Apart.
The recent coronation of King Charles III has not only raised the question whether Canada should remain a constitutional monarchy with Charles as our head of state, but has also further ramped up the questionable grievance movement for decolonization.
While some Canadians feel it’s time for a republican model of government - often overlooking what’s unfolding in the United States - in general, the constitutional monarchical system of democratic government has served Canada well since Confederation. This is a healthy debate as the current Liberal government appears in no rush to decide whether to maintain or cut the ties with the British Crown. There are definitely more pressing national issues including health care, climate change and national security.
However, of interest, if not concern to many Nova Scotians, and tied closely to the constitutional monarchy issue, is the growing condemnation of British colonialism at different levels of society. Much of the efforts to “bash the Brits” or “decolonize,” has come from either armchair academic adjudicators, or their students, well fed from courses on past injustices, or simplistic Marxist critiques of the oppressed and oppressors.
At the same time let’s not overlook some politicians who like to be in front of a parade, or are keen on apologies and sanitizing history, i.e. that we can morally judge the past, tear down statues, cancel former prime minister names from schools, and change university or street names - all from the vantage point of our modern sensibilities and contemporary values.
Nova Scotians and all Canadians need to challenge any action by governments, institutions or organizations to justify expunging parts of our history — the good and not so good.
As author Robert Boyer has noted in his book The Tyranny of Virtue, “There is a (sad) comedy in the rush of the well-heeled and enlightened to affirm their virtue by signaling their guilt.”
A recently released book by Oxford University Professor Emeritus Nigel Biggar, Colonialism: A Moral Reckoning, has shed light on how we need to carefully weigh the strengths and weaknesses of colonialism. His stated purpose in writing the book was “… to recalibrate public opinion of colonialism.”
As Biggar points out, colonialism is loaded with complexities. Striving to present a factual, nuanced account of the colonial era is no easy task when faced with balancing the negatives of racism, violence and exploitation on the one hand, with positive advancements such as stable democratic government, mandatory public education for children, minority rights, fair business practices, support for scientific exploration and research, and putting an end to the horrific transatlantic slave trade in the early 19th century.
“Many people, including professional historians, take their condemnation of colonialism way beyond what the evidence supports,” Biggar explains.
Colonialism’s origins in Nova Scotia go back more than 400 years when European settlers first arrived – notably the French and the English, but also later by Scottish, Irish, German, and others seeking a better life and opportunities, e.g. this year marks the 250th anniversary of the arrival of Scottish settlers aboard the cargo vessel Hector at Pictou. Many brought the concept of a liberal society that had been built up over time and fuelled further by the Enlightenment. Thus, to undermine, or delegitimize such a past in what now passes for “decolonization” is actually, in Biggar’s terms, a “cultural disease.”
Often too simplistic critiques of colonialism are advanced by activistjournalists with little regard for historical complexity and context. This was evident in HRM several years ago with the overwrought condemnation of Nova Scotia Governor Edward Cornwallis when it appeared some journalists (and historians) had "over-indulged" in the "revisionist Kool-aid" in accepting the simplistic and misleading notions that Nova Scotia and Canada as a whole has a history that is anything but shameful or violent.
Saying something long enough - such as calling Cornwallis’s 1749 bounty proclamation genocidal (without documented evidence), or implying land ownership through repetitive use of “unceded” terminology in public announcements, may have the general public thinking the comment or statement is true when the facts indicate otherwise.
With regard to Indigenous history and rights, they rightly focus on their treaty rights with the Crown. The role and powers of the Crown with respect to such treaties and how they are understood is critically important. And politically and legally, there will be no way to amend or change the role and powers of the Crown when it comes to such treaties without fully engaging Indigenous communities. To the anti-monarchists we say good luck with that.
Colonialism played an important role in the development of our Royal Province of Nova Scotia and beyond, including representative government (1758), responsible government (1848) and the first supreme court, all without engaging in a civil war. These and other accomplishments need to be acknowledged as positive steps toward the creation of the envied nation of Canada that we enjoy today. Our country is a stable and secure democracy due in large part because of the role of the British that made Confederation possible in 1867. Not in spite of it. Yes, there were failures along the way, but it is time to also recognize our many successes along with our new head of state.