[The_Architect]

I'd say more but no matter what I say Ontario will think it is the centre of the Canadian universe.

That's not fair. I knew all that stuff, as do most of the people I know.
We were also taught most of that in elementary schools on ONTARIO.
How much Ontario history is taught in Maritime schools?
The maritimes need to stop whining.

[MonctonRad]

It has become very clear that Joe Howe was correct back in the 1860's unfortunately ....

Funny, I was going to say the very same thing in my post. :haha:

The Maritimes had a very healthy economy based on trade with New England back in the 1860's. So, whats the first thing that Sir John A. did? He instituted his "National Policy" and erected trade barriers to promote growth in central Canada at the expense of the Maritimes existing trade relations with the U.S.

The Maritimes were screwed right from the beginning!

Joe Howe was smart enough to smell a rat.

[davidivivid]

Most of the time, history is taught from a regional perspective so it is unfortunate but somewhat understandable that Ontarians, for example, learn more about the history of their Province and the impact it had on the country as a whole. The same can be said for the Maritimes and Quebec.

As a resident of Quebec City, my history classes certainly revolved too much around the supposed importance of the city in Canada's early days. To this day, I still irrationally tend to be defensive about Quebec City's history. For example, I was rather irked (malgré moi) because of the following statement:

I always get a massive kick of how when most of Canada talks about Confederation they talk about Quebec yet that province only played a small role in the union of Upper, Lower and the Maritimes.

Here's what I remember from my history lessons.

In 1759, Quebec was the Capital of New France and because of its natural protection, it also was considered its stronghold. It was under siege for 2 months by the British forces. During the first 12 days alone, about 15 000 bombs and incendiary devices fell on Quebec and half the city was burned to the ground.

Only seven years later, it was under siege again, this time by the Americans. It lasted for 5 months until it was liberated by the british forces, 8000 men strong. The goal of the Americans was to 'liberate' Quebec from British rule and convince the population to become part of the original United States of America. Had they succeeded, it would have cut British North America in half.

From 1791 to 1838 it was home to the House of Assembly and Legislative Council of Lower Canada. Then, from 1852 to 1856 and from 1859 to 1866, it was the Capital of the Province of Canada.

The Quebec City Conference (1864) was the second meeting held to discuss the Canadian Confederation. It is then that the delegates from the Province of Canada, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island agreed on the 72 resolutions which would basically dictate the workings of the Confederation.

Quebec City also became a main entry point for immigrants. By 1830, 30 000 immigrants arrived/passed through the city each year, reason why about 40% of the population was Irish at that time.

[SpikePhanta]

I agree. Canadian history is very Ontario (and Quebec) centric.

How many people know about the significant actions in Atlantic Canada during the Seven Years War. OK, the fall of Fortress Louisburg and the Acadian deportation are discussed but how about the Battle of Fort Beausejour which was really the first major action of this war (sorry, Jumonville Glen and Fort Necessity were just frontier skirmishes). How about the Battle of the Restigouche, the Saint John River Campaign and the Battle of the Petitcodiac. Nobody knows.......

In the Revolutionary War, everyone knows about the attacks on Montreal and Quebec City but how about the Eddy Rebellion and the attack on Fort Cumberland? If this had succeeded, Nova Scotia (and NB) would be part of the states right now. How about the American privateer raid on Charlottetown when the provincial secretary was kidnapped and the Great Seal stolen?

There are a few neat anecdotes from the War of 1812, such as the story about when the residents of St. Stephen NB lent gunpowder to their neighbours in Calais Maine for the 4th of July celebration, even though they were supposedly at war with one another.

Does anyone in the ROC know anything about the Aroostook War in the 1830's when armed conflict nearly broke out between New Brunswick and Maine. No, instead we hear all about the Mackenzie Papineau rebellion which has no resonance here on the east coast.

We demand equity!!


I know that the various BC social studies text books for grades 9-10 does not include the stuff and events that you mentioned.

[davidivivid]

How many people know about the significant actions in Atlantic Canada during the Seven Years War. OK, the fall of Fortress Louisburg and the Acadian deportation are discussed but how about the Battle of Fort Beausejour which was really the first major action of this war (sorry, Jumonville Glen and Fort Necessity were just frontier skirmishes). How about the Battle of the Restigouche, the Saint John River Campaign and the Battle of the Petitcodiac. Nobody knows.......

In the Revolutionary War, everyone knows about the attacks on Montreal and Quebec City but how about the Eddy Rebellion and the attack on Fort Cumberland? If this had succeeded, Nova Scotia (and NB) would be part of the states right now. How about the American privateer raid on Charlottetown when the provincial secretary was kidnapped and the Great Seal stolen?

There are a few neat anecdotes from the War of 1812, such as the story about when the residents of St. Stephen NB lent gunpowder to their neighbours in Calais Maine for the 4th of July celebration, even though they were supposedly at war with one another.

Does anyone in the ROC know anything about the Aroostook War in the 1830's when armed conflict nearly broke out between New Brunswick and Maine. No, instead we hear all about the Mackenzie Papineau rebellion which has no resonance here on the east coast.

We demand equity!!

I do remember my history teacher briefly talking about the Eddy Rebellion, the attack on Fort Cumberland as well as the Aroostook War. However, you are correct: more emphasis should be placed on those important events in Canadian history.

[kirjtc2]

I dunno if it's changed since you went to school, but the social studies classes I took in school in NB in the 90s were *very* east coast-centric. We learned as much (if not more) about Fort Beausejour as the Plains of Abraham.

[ToxiK]

Just to get an idea, how many of you watched this video? Please be honest. :)

If you watched it, did you find it as interesting as I did?

I did! I even ordered some books by Michio Kaku.

[Some guy]

:previous: If you enjoy listening to him, I would also recommend listening to Neil Tyson. :tup: Tyson talks more about space and science-related topics though(Michio is more about future and technology). But they are both very fascinating, and to be honest, have changed the way I view the world.

[Dmajackson]

That's not fair. I knew all that stuff, as do most of the people I know.
We were also taught most of that in elementary schools on ONTARIO.
How much Ontario history is taught in Maritime schools?
The maritimes need to stop whining.

Plenty of Ontarian history that is of national importance is taught same as Quebec and the rest of Canada here in the Maritimes. You can't deny though that in the early years the Maritimes was the major player in Canadian history and unfortunately that tends to get severly overlooked. A lot of federal government movies I've seen promote Champlain going up the St. Lawrence as the first settling of Canada when in reality it was the third such event by Europeans (and lets not forget the First Nations).

What I always get a kick out of is the toughness of Halifax. People may love to make fun of us but for the 261 years we have been around for not a single force has tried to mess with us. We've managed to keep the French, Germans, and Americans out of our hometown during wars with them in the region.

We'll stop whining when the rest of Canada stops treating us like an OLD PORNO MAGAZINE. :P

BTW MonctonRad I think your posts are much more convincing and well-written then my pornographic references so keep up the good fight for our region. :tup:

[The_Architect]

Just to get an idea, how many of you watched this video? Please be honest. :)

If you watched it, did you find it as interesting as I did?

I watched it too, it was very interesting..
I remember reading about the different civilizations a couple years ago.

[someone123]

In the Maritimes, many textbooks and other materials come from Ontario or Quebec (if they are in French). There's a lot of politically correct supplementary stuff on the Acadians and natives but a lot of later history is ignored.

Often when there are national shows produced by the CBC etc. they have the same bias. For example, one of the Heritage Moments tells the story of responsible government in Ontario when it came first to Nova Scotia.

I don't think "local focus" is a good excuse for misrepresenting history.

[someone123]

The Maritimes had a very healthy economy based on trade with New England back in the 1860's. So, whats the first thing that Sir John A. did? He instituted his "National Policy" and erected trade barriers to promote growth in central Canada at the expense of the Maritimes existing trade relations with the U.S.

The Maritimes were screwed right from the beginning!

This is part of what's sad about the lack of historical perspective. People wonder about things like why the Maritimes and Quebec are "whiny". Both were undemocratically coerced into modern Canada in one way or another... then people in Ontario wonder what the problem is when they prescribe made-in-Ontario policies for culture and the economy.

[Only The Lonely..]

Plenty of Ontarian history that is of national importance is taught same as Quebec and the rest of Canada here in the Maritimes. You can't deny though that in the early years the Maritimes was the major player in Canadian history and unfortunately that tends to get severly overlooked. A lot of federal government movies I've seen promote Champlain going up the St. Lawrence as the first settling of Canada when in reality it was the third such event by Europeans (and lets not forget the First Nations).

What I always get a kick out of is the toughness of Halifax. People may love to make fun of us but for the 261 years we have been around for not a single force has tried to mess with us. We've managed to keep the French, Germans, and Americans out of our hometown during wars with them in the region.

We'll stop whining when the rest of Canada stops treating us like an OLD PORNO MAGAZINE. :P

BTW MonctonRad I think your posts are much more convincing and well-written then my pornographic references so keep up the good fight for our region. :tup:

I think the Maritimes are a fantastic place!

Halifax and St.John's are the two places on my Canadian hit list that I'd like to see next.

Sadly, growing up on the prairies we don't hear much about our cousins to the east.

Let's face it, the majority of Canadians reside in either Ontario or Quebec; hence, any text book is going to take things from their prespective.

[isaidso]

I always get a massive kick of how when most of Canada talks about Confederation they talk about Quebec yet that province only played a small role in the union of Upper, Lower and the Maritimes.

Some notes the ROC should remember;

- Newfoundland was first discovered by Europeans (around 1000AD)
- New Brunswick was home to the first temporary settlement (St. Croix)
- Nova Scotia was home to the first permnament settlement (Annapolis Royal)
- PEI is the birthplace of CONFEDERATION
- Union was first thought of for the Maritimes. We let the ROC join in on our great idea

I'd say more but no matter what I say Ontario will think it is the centre of the Canadian universe.

It has become very clear that Joe Howe was correct back in the 1860's unfortunately ....

You are correct. It always boggles me what a huge blind spot most Canadians have for Atlantic Canada. It's nothing short of historical revisionism. Atlantic Canada has faded from prominence, but the foundation of the country was first laid there, not central Canada.

[Only The Lonely..]

(Marois is another story all together: she can't string 2 intelligible English words together).




Neither could Chretien!

[Acajack]

:hell: :whip: Good christ man, you are like a cyber Gilles Duceppe

Where did I say that the appellation "Canadian", that I used for my fellow students, excluded me?

Geez, people are so sensitive.

[Acajack]

If you don't mind, may I ask how old you are?

On the verge of my 4th decade. Why do you ask?

[Acajack]

This is part of what's sad about the lack of historical perspective. People wonder about things like why the Maritimes and Quebec are "whiny". Both were undemocratically coerced into modern Canada in one way or another... then people in Ontario wonder what the problem is when they prescribe made-in-Ontario policies for culture and the economy.

This is not something you hear many "proud" Canadians (assuming you are) admit to very often! ;)

[Acajack]

Come on man, there is NO WAY that Gilles Duceppe did any of his education in English. I'm not convinced that he can even speak English! :)

:shrug: One cannot have paid any attention to federal politics over the past 20 years if one thinks that Gilles Duceppe cannot speak English.

[Acajack]

Let me tell you something. I am currently 16 years old in my junior or 3rd year of high school. I was born in Vancouver, but I have lived the past 7 years of my life in the Greater Los Angeles Area. On the first day of geography class in my freshman or 1st year of high school we had a test on the 50 states and their capitals. The results. . . I got a 98% (accidently mixing up Vermont and New Hampshire) and the second highest grade was 66%.

Now, I can tell you from the past 7 almost 8 years of living amongst them, Americans can be much more ignorant than you think(at least that's how my generation is turning out). They barely know their own states and can't do crap with a world map. Their history classes are most of the time biased and from 3 years of history in high school (you'll all find this extremely disappointing) . . . . . there have been a total of 3 pages(not front and back, just front) on Canada.

Note: My high school is one of the top in SoCal, a California Distinguished School.

Now I shall let you all discuss that. :D

Someguy, you can certainly provide interesting insight that few people on this forum can. However, this is just anecdotal based on the one high school you go to.

We all (or most us) all have our anecdotal experiences with Americans and Canadians. Mine are like those of many people here: Americans know their country's history and the major events, and the mechanics of their country quite well. Or at least, they know them a lot better than Canadians do the equivalents for Canada.

Canadians tend to mix up their history and institutional framework because of all the American crap they consume. And so many Canadians today think they can plead the Fifth Amendment in court, that they will get read the Miranda warning if they get arrested, that a foreigner needs a Green Card to work in Canada, that if you steal a car you get charged with Grand Theft Auto, that you are supposed to refer to a judge as "your hono(u)r", that the Prime Minister can be impeached, etc.

This may not be true of most people on this forum, where knowledge of Canada's history and institutions is quite a bit higher than in the overall population.

But one should never mistake a subgroup that one frequents for wider society. SSP Canada is not representative of the Canadian population.

Based on my experience, I would also say that most Americans suck when it comes to knowledge of the wider world. Canadians in general do better than the Americans on this front.

Also, within Canada people in Quebec tend to know Quebec and its history very well, much the same way that Americans know their own country. But most people in Quebec tend to know dick about the rest of Canada. (And likewise most people in the ROC know dick about Quebec, although many still seem to think they are experts about la belle province.)

On knowledge of the wider world, people in Quebec are about the same as other Canadians, although they tend to focus more on Africa and Latin America and less on Asia than other Canadians do.

[Acajack]

Acajack is one of the most articulate contributors to this forum, and I find his commentary and arguments to be very balanced.

Heh heh heh heh. Merci MolsonExport. Merci. :D :tup:

[davidivivid]

Also, within Canada people in Quebec tend to know Quebec and its history very well, much the same way that Americans know their own country. But most people in Quebec tend to know dick about the rest of Canada. (And likewise most people in the ROC know dick about Quebec, although many still seem to think they are experts about la belle province.)

On knowledge of the wider world, people in Quebec are about the same as other Canadians, although they tend to focus more on Africa and Latin America and less on Asia than other Canadians do.

It sums it up pretty nicely...

[freeweed]

It sums it up pretty nicely...

Yeah, I was going to say that this is one of the more fair, balanced comments I've read here in some time.

[Some guy]

Someguy, you can certainly provide interesting insight that few people on this forum can. However, this is just anecdotal based on the one high school you go to.

We all (or most us) all have our anecdotal experiences with Americans and Canadians. Mine are like those of many people here: Americans know their country's history and the major events, and the mechanics of their country quite well. Or at least, they know them a lot better than Canadians do the equivalents for Canada.

Canadians tend to mix up their history and institutional framework because of all the American crap they consume. And so many Canadians today think they can plead the Fifth Amendment in court, that they will get read the Miranda warning if they get arrested, that a foreigner needs a Green Card to work in Canada, that if you steal a car you get charged with Grand Theft Auto, that you are supposed to refer to a judge as "your hono(u)r", that the Prime Minister can be impeached, etc.

This may not be true of most people on this forum, where knowledge of Canada's history and institutions is quite a bit higher than in the overall population.

But one should never mistake a subgroup that one frequents for wider society. SSP Canada is not representative of the Canadian population.

Based on my experience, I would also say that most Americans suck when it comes to knowledge of the wider world. Canadians in general do better than the Americans on this front.

Also, within Canada people in Quebec tend to know Quebec and its history very well, much the same way that Americans know their own country. But most people in Quebec tend to know dick about the rest of Canada. (And likewise most people in the ROC know dick about Quebec, although many still seem to think they are experts about la belle province.)

On knowledge of the wider world, people in Quebec are about the same as other Canadians, although they tend to focus more on Africa and Latin America and less on Asia than other Canadians do.

I agree. What you have said is very true.

What I guess I am trying to say though is that Americans are living in a "bubble" world. Considering Canada is America's next door neighbor, number one trade partner, and share many common goals and the world's longest undefended border; Americans know much more about Mexican history than anything about Canada.

I know people that did not know Canada had cities or dense urban regions before the Olympics in Vancouver. Many still are unaware of what Canada is like(not many people watch the winter olympics here). Majority of the people believe that Canada is all forest and tundra, with freezing temperatures year-round, and that many people live in cabins or igloos(this perspective is from mostly people of my generation though). They are unaware of the world outside their borders.

You mentioned this information being from one source- my high school. Mostly true, but my family travels quite a lot and I have met and talked to people from all over the country. For the most part, it is the same thoughts I hear over and over again from people. I will say however that they tend to be much more ignorant in the southern states such as where I live(Southern California).

[Some guy]

On the verge of my 4th decade. Why do you ask?

I just wanted to know if you were around my age. As you could probably imagine, watching these types of videos at this time in my life can greatly impact my thoughts, feelings, and philosophies in the future. :tup:

After all, Michio mentioned in the video- my generation is the most important in human history. :notacrook:

[BretttheRiderFan]

I've been attending school in Alberta for the last 10 years or so (currently in grade 11) and in Social Studies classes over the last 5 years or so we were taught next to nothing about our own province or Western Canada for that matter. The extent of Western history we are taught is basically the Red River and Northwest Rebellions, and some residential school topics. Almost every detail about history we have been taught since grade 4 has been about the history of New France, Upper/Lower Canada, and Confederation era Canada, all of which centers around Quebec and Ontario. Also we are taught every year about Acadians, Louisbourg etc. Easily over 90% of the history we have been taught has been centred around Quebec, Ontario and the Maritimes.

[freeweed]

Majority of the people believe that Canada is all forest and tundra, with freezing temperatures year-round, and that many people live in cabins or igloos(this perspective is from mostly people of my generation though). They are unaware of the world outside their borders.

Don't take this personally because I really hate to generalize this badly, but... that says far more about your generation (actually, your age group) than it does Americans. Trust me, when I was in high school everyone I knew thought that everybody in the US carried several firearms and that gun battles occurred damn near every day in the streets. Plus a thousand other misconceptions so silly that I can hardly write them down without looking like I'm making them up.

I think you said you're in California currently - it makes sense that people there would pay much more attention to Mexico. It has about 3 million times as much influence on your local situation than Canada does. Actually, that's really the crux of the issue - and the heart of the Canadian superiority complex about the US. CANADA DOES NOT AFFECT THE US. For all intents and purposes, we are little more than a supplier of raw goods to them (with a bit of manufactured goods). Canada is where lumber/pulp comes from. Canada is where oil comes from. Etc etc etc.

Sure, we're geographically close. But Canada has as much influence on the US as Luxembourg does on Canada. And how much Luxembougian history/geography do you personally know?

Believe me, I've met just as many Europeans that think Canada is polar bears and igloos. If not more. We just don't matter to the rest of the world for the most part, and it really pisses us off. So we come up with these "wow, these folks sure are ignorant of everything!" proclamations. The US is our closest neighbour, has the most influence on us by far, so we obsess about them.

And cry when they do not obsess back.

[BretttheRiderFan]

I just wanted to know if you were around my age. As you could probably imagine, watching these types of videos at this time in my life can greatly impact my thoughts, feelings, and philosophies in the future. :tup:

After all, Michio mentioned in the video- my generation is the most important in human history. :notacrook:

Until the next one comes around :D

[MonkeyRonin]

Sure, we're geographically close. But Canada has as much influence on the US as Luxembourg does on Canada. And how much Luxembougian history/geography do you personally know?

Wow...talk about major inferiority complex.

The US's largest trading partner is...Canada (they import slightly more from China, but exports are by far largest to Canada, and overall Canada is the largest). Canada's trade with Luxembourg on the other hand is...pretty much nonexistent (it is a country of 500,000 after all).

Also, some of you either need to stop hanging out with utter morons, and/or cut the hyperbole. No, most Americans do not believe that "Canadians all live in igloos", and likewise, most Canadians do not believe that "all Americans own multiple guns and have shootouts every day".

[BretttheRiderFan]

:previous: What he said

[Some guy]

Brettherider, If you watch the video I am talking about, you'll understand what I mean. You're the same age as me anyway, right? You should definitly watch it, seriously. :tup:

[vid]

Until recently I thought the Plains of Abraham was an actual plain, located somewhere in the eastern townships or maybe New York.

Our education system isn't very good at history. It's more of an afterthought. Quebeckers and Atlantic Canadians know it more because it plays a bigger role in their culture. Outside of the fur trade and First Nations, history isn't a big deal in Northern Ontario, and in the west, History barely even exists.

[freeweed]

Our education system isn't very good at history. It's more of an afterthought. Quebeckers and Atlantic Canadians know it more because it plays a bigger role in their culture. Outside of the fur trade and First Nations, history isn't a big deal in Northern Ontario, and in the west, History barely even exists.

Oddly enough I still managed to take 3 years of history in high school and can barely remember any of it. It was a tremendous amount of memorization of names and dates. Sure did spend a lot of time on Louis Riel in Manitoba though.

[BretttheRiderFan]

Brettherider, If you watch the video I am talking about, you'll understand what I mean. You're the same age as me anyway, right? You should definitly watch it, seriously. :tup:

He sure raises some valid points, the point of my previous comment was that every generation sees itself as the most important. The changes in society even in the last 10 years are as big as the previous 50 years were, and the change in technology and communication over the next 50 years is almost unfathomable for us to understand now

[vid]

Yeah, we did a lot of "extra" stuff about Louis Riel up here. He isn't mentioned much in the Ontario curriculum so the teacher got some extra stuff.

I took three history courses in high school, the mandatory Canadian History course (which went from 1867 to 1930, as we ran out of time to get through the depression and onto WWII--the curriculum ends in 1945), Renaissance to Present (very Euro centric so again, the teacher got some extra stuff to teach us about what was going on in China and the middle east at the time, as well as stuff about central America's pre-Columbian cities), and Ancient History, though I dropped out of Ancient History because over 35 kids took that course and I don't do well in that environment. Renaissance to Present had only 8 kids, it was a great course. I also took World Issues which is sort of what comes after Canadian History, covering a lot of what happened since 1945 and contemporary things (like national politics), that course had 6 kids, also a good experience. It's probably one of the most interesting courses in the province's curriculum.

History now is organized more as a narrative, so I'm pretty oblivious to names and dates but I have a basic idea of what happened and which century it was in, at least.

[Dmajackson]

Somewhat fresh out of high school history classes (didnt take in 12 and 11 we didnt learn anything) I can remember some the things I learned in history in order I think the amount of time spent on Canadian topics went like this;

1) Quebec City and New France's role
2) Fortress of Louisbourg (rise and fall)
3) Confederation and the conferences
4) Louis Riel and the rebellions
5) Western Expansion (1800's to the Depression)
6) First Nations history (focus in textbooks on Ont. and Que) with interesting focus on the Beothuk
7) Viking expansion and founding of Newfoundland

Most of the major topics had field trips involved and growing up in Nova Scotia that meant a lot of bus trips and one airplane ride. I remember going to Lousibourg (and Cape Breton mines, Highland Village), Annapolis Royal (Fort Anne), Nova Scotia geology trips, Quebec City, and Ottawa with my classes (multiple schools).

Of course there was also impressively long focuses on WWI and WWII (aided by taking Call to Remembrance) but the only talk on Canadian soil involved in those were the Halifax Explosion, War Brides, and the Battle of the Atlantic none of which were exhaustively discussed.

[freeweed]

The changes in society even in the last 10 years are as big as the previous 50 years were

Err... no. There's just no other way to put this.

The Internet (which is basically the only important thing to have come around or at least become hugely influential in the last 10 years) pales in comparison to the civil rights movement, women's liberation, the baby boom, the rise of the teen as an actual demographic, the final end of colonialism, affordable international air travel, and a thousand other things that defined the 1950s-1980s.

If anything, society is becoming a bit more static every year compared to those turbulent times. I'm actually a bit disappointed every year when I realize just how little things are changing these days. Change was supposed to accelerate, and by now I was supposed to be able to complain a lot about how "things just aren't like they were in my day" - but beyond the ability to carry my entire music collection in my pocket, and cheap long distance communication, life is much as it was when I grew up in the 80s.

[someone123]

He sure raises some valid points, the point of my previous comment was that every generation sees itself as the most important. The changes in society even in the last 10 years are as big as the previous 50 years were, and the change in technology and communication over the next 50 years is almost unfathomable for us to understand now

I'm not sure this is true. My guess is that the world of 2010 would be much more recognizable to a person from 2000 than the world of 1960.

The big social change we've seen recently has come from the internet (specifically, the capability to support distributed two-way communication). Technologically, many things have been evolving. However, who is to say that these changes are bigger than the introduction of electricity, the combustion engine, radio, etc.? What about events like the world wars?

I think the view of ever-accelerating technological development is a bit oversimplified and ahistorical. It is a little worrisome because in North America we don't have much of a sense that things can stop or slide backward. They can and do.

[BretttheRiderFan]

Err... no. There's just no other way to put this.

The Internet (which is basically the only important thing to have come around or at least become hugely influential in the last 10 years) pales in comparison to the civil rights movement, women's liberation, the baby boom, the rise of the teen as an actual demographic, the final end of colonialism, affordable international air travel, and a thousand other things that defined the 1950s-1980s.

If anything, society is becoming a bit more static every year compared to those turbulent times. I'm actually a bit disappointed every year when I realize just how little things are changing these days. Change was supposed to accelerate, and by now I was supposed to be able to complain a lot about how "things just aren't like they were in my day" - but beyond the ability to carry my entire music collection in my pocket, and cheap long distance communication, life is much as it was when I grew up in the 80s.

Well almost everyone in the developed world uses the internet daily, and mobile devices have evolved in a freakishly quick progression. Look at what your cell phone could do 10 years ago vs what it does now, you can browse the internet, take photos and instantly upload them to Facebook, you can shop for groceries on your phone, turn your lights in your garage off from across the city, texting and IMing has replaced actual conversation for my generation and at least up to many of Gen X. You can access almost any piece of information you could want within 5-10 seconds and sites like Twitter and Facebook make almost every detail to people's lives known to anyone. Ways we intake media didn't change all that much from 1960-2000 like it has in the last 10 years. When's the last time you sat down and read a newspaper? You can do that online now and it's online the second it's published you don't wait for the next morning, you can listen to the radio online any station from around the world. Also the Westernization and development of countries like China and India are huge and will only become more significant.

How much did the civil rights movement change the reality for blacks in America? It was huge, don't get me wrong, but the systemic realities are that blacks still aren't equal with whites and ghettos full of crime and poverty can still be found in most American cities. Women's liberation happened mostly in the early 20th century, didn't it?

[BretttheRiderFan]

I'm not sure this is true. My guess is that the world of 2010 would be much more recognizable to a person from 2000 than the world of 1960.

The big social change we've seen recently has come from the internet (specifically, the capability to support distributed two-way communication). Technologically, many things have been evolving. However, who is to say that these changes are bigger than the introduction of electricity, the combustion engine, radio, etc.? What about events like the world wars?
I think the view of ever-accelerating technological development is a bit oversimplified and ahistorical. It is a little worrisome because in North America we don't have much of a sense that things can stop or slide backward. They can and do.

All of these events had happened by 1960

[freeweed]

Well almost everyone in the developed world uses the internet daily, and mobile devices have evolved in a freakishly quick progression. Look at what your cell phone could do 10 years ago vs what it does now, you can browse the internet, take photos and instantly upload them to Facebook, you can shop for groceries on your phone, turn your lights in your garage off from across the city, texting and IMing has replaced actual conversation for my generation and at least up to many of Gen X. You can access almost any piece of information you could want within 5-10 seconds and sites like Twitter and Facebook make almost every detail to people's lives known to anyone. Ways we intake media didn't change all that much from 1960-2000 like it has in the last 10 years. When's the last time you sat down and read a newspaper? You can do that online now and it's online the second it's published you don't wait for the next morning, you can listen to the radio online any station from around the world.

You could do all of this in the 1990s, the only difference is that today you can do it while riding the bus. Actually, you could do quite a bit of this in the 1980s if you were willing to pay for it. However, none of this has vastly changed society in any meaningful way. While I can't quite perfectly relate to teens who spend all day texting, they aren't fundamentally any different than I was when I talk to them. We just were tied to our landlines. Mobile devices might allow you to do it remotely, but as a teen you're just as likely to have your schedule dictated by your parents and not your phone. Hell, if anything teens are far LESS mobile today than they were 25 years ago. The "stranger danger" generation is far more closely tied to home than I ever was.

How much did the civil rights movement change the reality for blacks in America? It was huge, don't get me wrong, but the systemic realities are that blacks still aren't equal with whites and ghettos full of crime and poverty can still be found in most American cities. Women's liberation happened mostly in the early 20th century, didn't it?

I think you need to read some more history. Blacks in the 1940s and blacks today are almost an entirely different society. Yes, racism still exists and poverty is a huge issue. But they can vote, join the army, marry other races, play professional sports, hold decent jobs, run for public office, sit at the front of the bus, and get a proper education. All of these were denied to them (at least in large part) before the 1960s.

Women may have gotten the vote in the early 20th century, but if you think that's all women's lib was... yikes. This is a great example of how poorly taught history is. The birth control pill alone has changed society far more than an iPhone ever will, and you can quote me on that in 40 years time. Go visit a Muslim theocracy and tell me their women are basically the same as us.

I hope I'm not coming across as a rude jackass as it's not my intent at all (if anything I'm a cantankerous old fart). I'm actually quite the technophile and I've seen huge changes in my personal day-to-day life as a result of 15 years of near-constant online activity, both desktop and mobile. I probably spend more time online than even the most twitter-addicted teenager. But I can tell you that it really hasn't fundamentally changed society much. In another 20 years, maybe. For now it's basically entertainment and a more efficient way to do things we already could do before (communications, mail order shopping, information gathering, etc). But it hasn't created anything NEW. Texting has no more replaced actual conversation than the telephone did. You'll still need to talk face-to-face with a lot of people for the rest of your life, at work, at home, at school, and damn near everywhere else.

[freeweed]

I've been hemming and hawing over this all week, but, speaking of vast changes to society as a result of the Internet...

I won't put high odds on it, but this whole Wikileaks thing could finally be the "big thing" that drastically changes society as a direct result of the Internet. Depending on just how much and what they end up releasing, and the public's reaction - I can see governments being taken down, corporations dissolved - hell, the entire global financial system could be dismantled if this gets big enough. Imagine our current globalmegahypermulticorps being entirely torn apart as a result, and our governments completely re-forming. Globalisation is arguably the largest single change of the past 30 years.

Like I said, I kinda doubt it. People seem just too apathetic (I'm astounded at regular Joes calling for Assange to be killed - WTF). But you never know. THAT would finally make me agree with some of the previous statements.

[vid]

I'm astounded at regular Joes calling for Assange to be killed - WTF.

I suppose that, like Professor Tom Flanagan, they just want to "feel like men" by calling for the death of a person they don't like.

[Some guy]

Err... no. There's just no other way to put this.

The Internet (which is basically the only important thing to have come around or at least become hugely influential in the last 10 years) pales in comparison to the civil rights movement, women's liberation, the baby boom, the rise of the teen as an actual demographic, the final end of colonialism, affordable international air travel, and a thousand other things that defined the 1950s-1980s.

If anything, society is becoming a bit more static every year compared to those turbulent times. I'm actually a bit disappointed every year when I realize just how little things are changing these days. Change was supposed to accelerate, and by now I was supposed to be able to complain a lot about how "things just aren't like they were in my day" - but beyond the ability to carry my entire music collection in my pocket, and cheap long distance communication, life is much as it was when I grew up in the 80s.

Your comment regarding a slow in technological advances reminded me of this clip I watched a while ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQhNZENMG1o
You must watch it until the end to fully understand the correlation (this guy is an excellent speaker by the way)

[Acajack]

Don't take this personally because I really hate to generalize this badly, but... that says far more about your generation (actually, your age group) than it does Americans. Trust me, when I was in high school everyone I knew thought that everybody in the US carried several firearms and that gun battles occurred damn near every day in the streets. Plus a thousand other misconceptions so silly that I can hardly write them down without looking like I'm making them up.

I think you said you're in California currently - it makes sense that people there would pay much more attention to Mexico. It has about 3 million times as much influence on your local situation than Canada does. Actually, that's really the crux of the issue - and the heart of the Canadian superiority complex about the US. CANADA DOES NOT AFFECT THE US. For all intents and purposes, we are little more than a supplier of raw goods to them (with a bit of manufactured goods). Canada is where lumber/pulp comes from. Canada is where oil comes from. Etc etc etc.

Sure, we're geographically close. But Canada has as much influence on the US as Luxembourg does on Canada. And how much Luxembougian history/geography do you personally know?

Believe me, I've met just as many Europeans that think Canada is polar bears and igloos. If not more. We just don't matter to the rest of the world for the most part, and it really pisses us off. So we come up with these "wow, these folks sure are ignorant of everything!" proclamations. The US is our closest neighbour, has the most influence on us by far, so we obsess about them.

And cry when they do not obsess back.

The comparison with Luxembourg is a bit over the top but in essence he is right.

Why should Americans know a lot about Canada? There is very little about Canada that "makes a splash", either positively or negatively, which is usually what heightens people's knowledge of other countries.

Most worldly Canadians know more about Zimbabwe (Ian Smith, Robert Mugabe, Rhodesia, etc.) than they do about a place like Ghana, which is much larger.

Canada just doesn't have much that stands out. Very few negatives luckily, and the positives (mostly cultural) are almost never uniquely Canadian (usually they are generic or copycat American), unlike those of a place like Australia which are very strongly identified with their country of origin: Mad Max, Men at Work, Priscilla Queen of the Desert, Crocodile Dundee, etc.

This doesn't mean Canada is in a bad spot:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/126116/canada-places-first-image-contest-iran-last.aspx

Canada is a well-liked, admired and valued neighbour and ally for the vast majority of Americans.

That's good enough for me. People in West Virginia don't have to recite Royal Canadian Air Farce or Rock et Belles Oreilles sketches to me in order to make me happy about my relationship with them.

Also, Canadians should perhaps start by paying more attention to their own culture and history themselves before complaining that Americans don't know anything about it.

[Acajack]

I agree. What you have said is very true.

What I guess I am trying to say though is that Americans are living in a "bubble" world. Considering Canada is America's next door neighbor, number one trade partner, and share many common goals and the world's longest undefended border; Americans know much more about Mexican history than anything about Canada.

I know people that did not know Canada had cities or dense urban regions before the Olympics in Vancouver. Many still are unaware of what Canada is like(not many people watch the winter olympics here). Majority of the people believe that Canada is all forest and tundra, with freezing temperatures year-round, and that many people live in cabins or igloos(this perspective is from mostly people of my generation though). They are unaware of the world outside their borders.

You mentioned this information being from one source- my high school. Mostly true, but my family travels quite a lot and I have met and talked to people from all over the country. For the most part, it is the same thoughts I hear over and over again from people. I will say however that they tend to be much more ignorant in the southern states such as where I live(Southern California).

I do agree and have said before that "wider world" knowledge is not Americans' strong-suit.

But we were mostly discussing the relative knowledge of Canadians and Americans of their own countries.

On this front, Americans don't all have to be learned scholars of United States history and civics. They just have to be better than Canadians when it comes to Canadian history and civics. And the Americans are better on average than us on this front. By a longshot.

[The_Architect]

And the Americans are better on average than us on this front. By a longshot.

Again, debatable. I disagree. By a longshot.

[Acajack]

http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2009/06/14/quebec-tops-in-teaching-canadian-history/

[The_Architect]

http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2009/06/14/quebec-tops-in-teaching-canadian-history/

That doesn't explain your comment. Fail.
And biased articles don't count as proof.

[Acajack]

More info:
http://www.dominion.ca/YoungAdultHistory3.pdf

[The_Architect]

More info:
http://www.dominion.ca/YoungAdultHistory3.pdf

Sample != Population

[shreddog]

Anecdotes and personal opinions aside, here is an interesting survey (http://www.dominion.ca/CanadaDay.Survey.DominionInstitute.1July08.pdf)done by Ipsos Reid (on behalf of the Dominion Institute) - possibly the best non-biased source I could easily find - that showcases that some people in Canada shouldn't be so confident regarding historical knowledge.

While taken in 2008, I don't expect that the results will have changed.

Highlights are as follows:
- Canadians seem to know more about the US's history than their own.

- Americans seem to know their history better than Canadians know their own; 90% of Americans know their first President whereas only 61% of Canadians know about Sir John.

- 87% of Americans know the slogan to their constitutional slogan (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness0 whereas only 49% of us Canucks know that "peace, order and good government" is ours.

Finally - and this shocks the hell out of me - 79% of Yanks know the first line of their national anthem while only 53% of Canadians know the first line to ours (WTF!!!!!:omg:)

While I won't hold this survey up as irrefutable proof the Yanks are geniuses and we're all dunces, I think it does throw cold water on certain assumptions of Canadian superiority!!

ANECDOTE ALERT!!!

I lived in California for a number of years and can attest that most of the people - and intelligent ones at that - that I encountered knew little about Canada. They also knew little about Iowa, Ohio and most other states, nevermind the rest of the world. Hell, the only thing most knew about Florida was that Cali oranges were "better"!

They have a huge country with lots going on and as such it makes it easy to be insular. That said, I know MANY Canadians who are just as oblivious to the world not connected to their local malls!

[shreddog]

I see Acajack beat me to the Dominion Institute!

Anyway Architect, please explan to me why 47% of Canadians don't know "O Canada, Out home and Native Land"?????

[Acajack]

Sample != Population

Then I guess there is no way to draw conclusions about anything.

Maybe African-Americans are in fact richer on average than white Americans.

Maybe aboriginal Canadians are in fact richer than non-aboriginal Canadians.

Maybe Alberta is in fact the largest French-speaking province in the country.

Maybe St. John's has more Asian-origin residents than Vancouver.

Who knows?

Everything is up for grabs!

[shreddog]

Sample != Population
I'm sorry, are you saying that unless every person is asked a question, it cannot be a true survey?? You do realise that their is a whole branch of mathematics called "Statistics" that kind proves that wrong??

[Acajack]

Anecdotes and personal opinions aside, here is an interesting survey (http://www.dominion.ca/CanadaDay.Survey.DominionInstitute.1July08.pdf)done by Ipsos Reid (on behalf of the Dominion Institute) - possibly the best non-biased source I could easily find - that showcases that some people in Canada shouldn't be so confident regarding historical knowledge.

While taken in 2008, I don't expect that the results will have changed.

Highlights are as follows:
- Canadians seem to know more about the US's history than their own.

- Americans seem to know their history better than Canadians know their own; 90% of Americans know their first President whereas only 61% of Canadians know about Sir John.

- 87% of Americans know the slogan to their constitutional slogan (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness0 whereas only 49% of us Canucks know that "peace, order and good government" is ours.

Finally - and this shocks the hell out of me - 79% of Yanks know the first line of their national anthem while only 53% of Canadians know the first line to ours (WTF!!!!!:omg:)

While I won't hold this survey up as irrefutable proof the Yanks are geniuses and we're all dunces, I think it does throw cold water on certain assumptions of Canadian superiority!!

ANECDOTE ALERT!!!

I lived in California for a number of years and can attest that most of the people - and intelligent ones at that - that I encountered knew little about Canada. They also knew little about Iowa, Ohio and most other states, nevermind the rest of the world. Hell, the only thing most knew about Florida was that Cali oranges were "better"!

They have a huge country with lots going on and as such it makes it easy to be insular. That said, I know MANY Canadians who are just as oblivious to the world not connected to their local malls!

Thanks Shreddog. Your survey is even better than mine.

Note that surveys like these (about which we hear on the news from time to time), are also part of our personal anecdotes. I've heard about so many surveys like these that if one came out where Canadians were actually shown to be very knowledgeable about Canada and its history, it would stand out so much (in a man-bites-dog sort of way) that I and many others would surely remember it.

Also note that, as expected, Quebecers absolutely sucked at most of the questions, except the ones that had a more Quebec focus.

Also, the survey is very anglo-centric. For example, I doubt most people in Quebec have heard of Jane Austen, Harriet Beecher Stowe or Susanna Moodie. I speak at least a little English, read books and had never heard of Moodie until now. I think most Quebecers would do better with a list of francophone authors from which they'd have to pick out the (French) Canadian ones. Same goes with visual artists. Put a list of painters like Claude Monet, Jean-Paul Riopelle, Henri Matisse, Alfred Pellan, Edgar Degas and probably more Quebecers would be able to pick out Riopelle and Pellan as being from their country, than they did with Rockwell, Jackson and company.

[freeweed]

- 87% of Americans know the slogan to their constitutional slogan (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness0 whereas only 49% of us Canucks know that "peace, order and good government" is ours.

I'll be honest, I'm a fairly-better-than-average educated person, I have a mind like a steel trap for trivia, and I read and absorb a lot of otherwise useless information from books, Wikipedia, research journals, you name it.

If you had walked up to me on the street and asked me "what is our constitutional slogan", my response would be "constitutions have slogans??". I've heard both of those phrases many thousands of times in my life (the US one far more often than the Canadian...) but I can't say that I'd be able to exactly pinpoint where they're from. And I've actually read both countries' constitutions several times each, which is something I'd be amazed if even 1% of the population has done.

I guess what I'm saying is, I find it hard to believe that 49% of Canadians actually knew the answer there. Unless it was a "match slogan X with country Y" type of thing.

Regardless, that survey confirms what those of us who are well-travelled and well-read generally know. As opposed to tired stereotypes and narrowed worldviews.

[freeweed]

Anyway Architect, please explan to me why 47% of Canadians don't know "O Canada, Out home and Native Land"?????

Not everyone is a hockey fan (they play it at the start of every game, for the 53% that may not actually know this).

[shreddog]

... Also, the survey is very anglo-centric. ... I think most Quebecers would do better with a list of francophone authors ... Quebecers would be able to pick out Riopelle and Pellan as being from their country, than they did with Rockwell, Jackson and company.
Ding, Ding, Ding - we are all slaves to our biases and exposures. As Freeweed said earlier, Canada is not very relevant in the day-to-day lifes of Americans at large, so they don't tend to know much about us. As I said earlier, most Angelenos know shit all about Goliad, yet every Texan does. No reason to take offence or feel smug - it just is.

Anyway, this is abit of a Muggs game. As Wikileaks has now painted Canadians as having an inferioty complex, we must continue to fight back via our historical supremacy - or at least the one we'd like to think we have.

[Acajack]

Regardless, that survey confirms what those of us who are well-travelled and well-read generally know. As opposed to tired stereotypes and narrowed worldviews.


And what is it exactly that those of us who are well-travelled and well-read generally know? (Not presuming here that either of these qualities applies to me.)

[shreddog]

Not everyone is a hockey fan (they play it at the start of every game, for the 53% that may not actually know this).
I know that you're being sarcastic, but COME ON!!! There is no way close to 100% of Canadians shouldn't know this!! Regardless of whether they go to hockey games or not!

[freeweed]

And what is it exactly that those of us who are well-travelled and well-read generally know? (Not presuming here that either of these qualities applies to me.)

That the old "Americans are all ignorant of everything" stereotype isn't true.

Years ago, it was "Americans can't even find Ontario on the map - it's Canada's biggest province for god's sake!!!". This meme has slowly devolved to the point where many Canadians actually believe that the vast majority of Americans can't actually find their country on a globe, can't name hardly any of their own states, and know virtually nothing of their own history. While there's a large range between those 2 extremes, this thread is living proof that Canadians still in large part hold to these stereotypes to one degree or another.

When you actually travel in the US, and read actual studies on this thing, you find out the truth: while they may be less knowledgeable about any given topic, and sure, in aggregate they may have a more narrow worldview than the average Canadian - these claims of Americans not knowing anything are almost always inflated way out of proportion.

I met a Canadian once who didn't know that PEI was an island (I kid you not). Does that mean Canadians are generally ignorant of their own country? Of course not. Yet for some reason when a lot of Canadians hear of an American who can't find Ontario on a map, they instantly assume that all Americans are dumb ignorant hicks.

Long story short, they're nowhere near as stupid as we (in general) make them out to be. And studies have proven this many times.

[freeweed]

I know that you're being sarcastic, but COME ON!!! There is no way close to 100% of Canadians shouldn't know this!! Regardless of whether they go to hockey games or not!

I'll be honest with you. Without hockey games (and the Olympics), I'd almost never have heard the anthem after grade school or so. I wouldn't be surprised at all if that piece of knowledge slowly left my brain years and decades later - seriously, what value is there in retaining it if you're not using it?

Maybe I'm just not as much of a cover-your-heart, flag-waving patriot as some. Hell, I can barely remember when we got our own flag. Then again, I've never been much for symbolism so maybe it's just me.

[The_Architect]

Then I guess there is no way to draw conclusions about anything.

Maybe African-Americans are in fact richer on average than white Americans.

Maybe aboriginal Canadians are in fact richer than non-aboriginal Canadians.

Maybe Alberta is in fact the largest French-speaking province in the country.

Maybe St. John's has more Asian-origin residents than Vancouver.

Who knows?

Everything is up for grabs!

90% of my grade 11 history class knows the order in which Canada's provinces joined the country. Therefore, according to you, 90% of Canada knows. It is not true however. Just because less than 50% of that sample knew who John A MacDonald was doesn't mean less than 50% of Canada knows. THAT is called statistics and error. Your comment is just a ridiculous attempt at making yourself look witty.

[Acajack]

I'll be honest with you. Without hockey games (and the Olympics), I'd almost never have heard the anthem after grade school or so.

I was just wondering about O Canada at school. I moved around and went to school (in English, French and French immersion), and only in one of them (Ontario) was O Canada sung at the start of every day. And none of these provinces were Quebec - I live in Quebec currently but have never gone to school here.

I have gone to English-language schools in majority anglophone provinces where O Canada was not sung. Except maybe on Remembrance Day, in addition to God Save the Queen.

My school years were some time ago (the 80s) but I would be interested in other people's experiences with O Canada and schools.

Note that my kids are currently in school in French in Quebec, and O Canada is not sung in the morning. This is pretty much the case for all francophone schools in Quebec. Not sure about anglo schools in Quebec, but I suspect they probably sing O Canada every morning.

And the children of many of my relatives and friends attend school in Ottawa (English or French). As far as I know O Canada is sung every morning in all of them.

[Acajack]

90% of my grade 11 history class knows the order in which Canada's provinces joined the country. Therefore, according to you, 90% of Canada knows. It is not true however. Just because less than 50% of that sample knew who John A MacDonald was doesn't mean less than 50% of Canada knows. THAT is called statistics and error. Your comment is just a ridiculous attempt at making yourself look witty.

Ipsos Reid is somewhat more reputable than a show of hands in a single high school history class.

Out of curiosity, are you in high school at the moment?

[The_Architect]

Anyway Architect, please explan to me why 47% of Canadians don't know "O Canada, Out home and Native Land"?????

I can't explain that, because I have only ever lived in Ontario.
But in Ontario schools, the national anthem is sung every day before school. Most students know it in both English and French, myself included.

[Acajack]

That the old "Americans are all ignorant of everything" stereotype isn't true.

Years ago, it was "Americans can't even find Ontario on the map - it's Canada's biggest province for god's sake!!!". This meme has slowly devolved to the point where many Canadians actually believe that the vast majority of Americans can't actually find their country on a globe, can't name hardly any of their own states, and know virtually nothing of their own history. While there's a large range between those 2 extremes, this thread is living proof that Canadians still in large part hold to these stereotypes to one degree or another.

When you actually travel in the US, and read actual studies on this thing, you find out the truth: while they may be less knowledgeable about any given topic, and sure, in aggregate they may have a more narrow worldview than the average Canadian - these claims of Americans not knowing anything are almost always inflated way out of proportion.

I met a Canadian once who didn't know that PEI was an island (I kid you not). Does that mean Canadians are generally ignorant of their own country? Of course not. Yet for some reason when a lot of Canadians hear of an American who can't find Ontario on a map, they instantly assume that all Americans are dumb ignorant hicks.

Long story short, they're nowhere near as stupid as we (in general) make them out to be. And studies have proven this many times.

They (Americans) certainly have their share of problems but as far as sheer national greatness and brilliance go, they have invented more stuff and innovated in more areas than any other country in living memory.

And it's not just because they are the biggest rich developed country population-wise.

On a per capita basis, the U.S. is unquestionably of a bastion of human excellence. Just because all of their citizens are not up the standard does not take anything away from all that Americans have achieved.

I personally am not really that much of an Americanophile, but if one is fair-minded one still has to give credit where credit is due.

[Gerrard]

I would have said Trudeau for the longest serving PM. Surprised the crazy guy was the answer.

[The_Architect]

Ipsos Reid is somewhat more reputable than a show of hands in a single high school history class.

Out of curiosity, are you in high school at the moment?

No I am not.

And my point was that my history class wasn't refutable. Technically no statistics based on a sample are truly refutable. Maybe the day they did their survey was a bad day.. maybe they chose people from one area, maybe they just got straight up stupid people out of bad luck..

[Jay in Cowtown]

Will our country ever be annexed by the USA?


doubtful...

but at least we'd have more HD channels if they did! :haha:

[shreddog]

Hell, I can barely remember when we got our own flag.
Of course you do .. it was July 1 1867.;)

That said, we got our first official flag* on Feb 15, 1965 - the Pearson maple leaf - however the old ensign was always "our own flag"!

*the three variations of the Canadian Red Ensign were never officially sactioned by Parliament.


Back to your comments about the anthem, I guess I just have a good memory - I don't really go to hockey games.

[shreddog]

No I am not.

And my point was that my history class wasn't refutable. Technically no statistics based on a sample are truly refutable. Maybe the day they did their survey was a bad day.. maybe they chose people from one area, maybe they just got straight up stupid people out of bad luck..

Let me guess, since you've never seen an atom, they don't exist, right?
Or how about the earth, how can you be sure it is round since you've never seen it from space.
And how do you know how many people live in Toronto - have you counted them??

Your dismissal of Statistics so flippantly shows much more about your education than any claim of historical knowledge or understanding of other cultures. (Sorry, don't mean to get personal, but you starting digging that hole!)

EDIT: Architect, I guess you did better in History than English ... since I think you really mean irrefutable ... then again I could be wrong and you really meant to say that all statistics based on a sample are absolutely correct!

[shreddog]

Anyway, as much fun as this thread is - I need to get back to other things.

Oh, and as to the OPs question, since the Yanks are uneducated and lazy, the answer is "No, we won't be annexed" since that would require them knowing where to find us.

[The_Architect]

Let me guess, since you've never seen an atom, they don't exist, right?
Or how about the earth, how can you be sure it is round since you've never seen it from space.
And how do you know how many people live in Toronto - have you counted them??

Your dismissal of Statistics so flippantly shows much more about your education than any claim of historical knowledge or understanding of other cultures. (Sorry, don't mean to get personal, but you starting digging that hole!)

I wasn't dismissing statistics. I just very highly doubt that less than 50% of Canadians don't know their first prime minister, and I was explaining possible variables as to why it is that low.

As for my education, it was fine thank you very much. One of the top high schools in the province and one of the top 3 universities in the country. Please find out more information before you insult my education. I have already explained that almost all of this stuff that Canadians don't know I do in fact know, so obviously education or knowledge is no problem.

In statistics class we are not taught that every stat you see is true and you should believe everything you read based on their "statistics". We are taught that statistics can be a very valuable tool, but do not always represent the population. We are also taught how to "lie with statistics", just so we know how they can be used to manipulate people.

[shreddog]

As for my education, ... I do in fact no, so obviously education or knowledge is no problem.
I'm sorry, but I just had to .... :haha:

[The_Architect]

I'm sorry, but I just had to .....:haha:

Damn. Huge write up and miss one typo. Fixed now.:rolleyes:

[shreddog]

As for my education, it was fine thank you very much. One of the top high schools in the province and one of the top 3 universities in the country. Please find out more information before you insult my education. I have already explained that almost all of this stuff that Canadians don't know I do in fact know, so obviously education or knowledge is no problem.
Okay sport, here's your chance ... a simple history question that you should be able to answer without resorting to Google or a book - are you up for it?

Free trade was one of the most devisive political issues in Canada's history. When it was first proposed by this Prime Minister from Quebec, it almost caused rioting in the streets and pretty much forced every Canadian into one camp or the other. And the final decision had one of the most significant impacts on the Canadian economy in the 20th century.

For all the marbles, can you name this Prime Minister and whether the Liberals or the Conservatives were for the free trade deal?? (remember, no cheating!)

[Acajack]

I wasn't dismissing statistics. I just very highly doubt that less than 50% of Canadians don't know their first prime minister, and I was explaining possible variables as to why it is that low.



All things (including personal experience) considered, I'd say half of Canadians being able to name Sir John A. Macdonald is actually a pretty good score!

[shreddog]

Damn. Huge write up and miss one typo. Fixed now.:rolleyes:
The moral here is anytime you are extolling how great your education is and how smart you are ONE TYPO pretty much negates that claim.

This is especially true on a resume!!

EDIT - that was a huge write up??? All I can is WOW!

[The_Architect]

Okay sport, here's your chance ... a simple history question that you should be able to answer without resorting to Google or a book - are you up for it?

Free trade was one of the most devisive political issues in Canada's history. When it was first proposed by this Prime Minister from Quebec, it almost caused rioting in the streets and pretty much forced every Canadian into one camp or the other. And the final decision had one of the most significant impacts on the Canadian economy in the 20th century.

For all the marbles, can you name this Prime Minister and whether the Liberals or the Conservatives were for the free trade deal?? (remember, no cheating!)

Laurier did and it caused him to lose the election in 1911 to Borden. Happy?

[The_Architect]

The moral here is anytime you are extolling how great your education is and how smart you are ONE TYPO pretty much negates that claim.

This is especially true on a resume!!

EDIT - that was a huge write up??? All I can is WOW!

For a forum. Not life. And for a response to someone questioning your education. It was also an exaggeration on my part.

[shreddog]

Laurier did and it caused him to lose the election in 1911 to Borden. Happy?
There's hope yet for the future!!

As promised ...
http://www.impawards.com/1981/posters/all_the_marbles.jpg

EDIT - replaced with a much better picture of "all the marbles"

[vid]

Has your statistics class taught you what a sample is? Like, how they go through a database of thousands of people, select a group that most closely mirrors the age, income, ethnicity and gender demographics of the survey area to make the most accurate estimates possible?

It isn't just "pick 2,000 random people". There is science behind it. To compare a survey of the other students in your high school class to a professional survey done by a polling company is absurd.

[The_Architect]

Alright so is that the end of accusations about my education and knowledge of history? Awesome. :notacrook:

Back to the topic at hand... wait what was the topic again? :P

EDIT: Has your statistics class taught you what a sample is? Like, how they go through a database of thousands of people, select a group that most closely mirrors the age, income, ethnicity and gender demographics of the survey area to make the most accurate estimates possible?

It isn't just "pick 2,000 random people". There is science behind it.

Yes it has, I was just saying there are other ways they could have drawn their results. If it is true, that is very sad.. but it is the people I have dealt with/are friends with that caused me to be skeptical.

[Acajack]

No I am not.

And my point was that my history class wasn't refutable. Technically no statistics based on a sample are truly refutable. Maybe the day they did their survey was a bad day.. maybe they chose people from one area, maybe they just got straight up stupid people out of bad luck..

Consider this:

Pretty much everyone I hang out on a regular basis with is francophone Québécois. Almost every single one of them can speak English to a reasonable degree. Close to half them can also get by in Spanish.

Yet, according to Statistics Canada and every other poll or study I have seen, only between 35 and 40% of francophone Québécois can speak English, and only around 5% of them can speak Spanish.

Still according to Statistics Canada and various studies and polls, just a shade over 60% of francophones in my city can speak English. Though this makes us one of the most bilingual cities in the country, it still leaves a lot of people who can only speak French in this town.

Furthermore, I was at a restaurant last night here in my city and had to briefly translate between an anglo lady (likely from Ontario) and some young francophone women who were having trouble understanding her.

Yet all of my friends (living in the same city as these unilingual girls) are bilingual and many are trilingual! How is this possible?

So which is more reputable,

the conclusions about language abilities in Gatineau and Quebec that one can draw from my entourage?
OR
census figures, other polls and studies augmented by anecdotal stuff I see all the time out there in the real world?

Whaddaya think? Are they both equally reputable?

[kool maudit]

it was either this

http://images.nintendolife.com/news/2008/11/usa_vc_update_space_harrier/attachment/0/large.jpg

or a story about acajack's favourite sort of cat.

it's hard to remember and life is full of strange surprises.

[Acajack]

it was either this

http://images.nintendolife.com/news/2008/11/usa_vc_update_space_harrier/attachment/0/large.jpg

or a story about acajack's favourite sort of cat.

it's hard to remember and life is full of strange surprises.

WTF? I hate cats.

Arrghh now the pets' rights people will all come down on me like a ton of bricks!

[vid]

Yes it has, I was just saying there are other ways they could have drawn their results. If it is true, that is very sad.. but it is the people I have dealt with/are friends with that caused me to be skeptical.

You're talking to kids who are still in school though. The knowledge is fresh in their heads. When I was 18 I could power through a trigonometry assignment in a few minutes. Now, I can barely remember the basic rules.

Give them a few years. They'll forget, just like the rest of us.

I think most Canadians can name Sir John A. McDonald--he is on the 10. Do they all know he was the first prime minister? Probably not.

[The_Architect]

WTF? I hate cats.

Arrghh now the pets' rights people will all come down on me like a ton of bricks!

Agreed cats are cocky sh*ts.. :haha:

But on a sort-of related topic, if for any reason the US did decide it would try to "annex" (invade) Canada, who do you think would be on our side and who do you think would be on theirs? Or would they all be like "it's their problem" and twiddle their thumbs?

[The_Architect]

You're talking to kids who are still in school though. The knowledge is fresh in their heads. When I was 18 I could power through a trigonometry assignment in a few minutes. Now, I can barely remember the basic rules.

Give them a few years. They'll forget, just like the rest of us.

Though yes most of them are still students, I also include people who I worked with while on a co-op work term who range between 20 and 70. Yes, they are educated men and women who are obviously all smart, but that is just who I have to go by.
Yes I know that census data is the most reliable, I was just skeptical because it is very sad if true.

[kool maudit]

WTF? I hate cats.



goddamned cat-disliking frenchies.

i'd ship them all back to franceland if i could.

[vid]

And where did you do your co-op?

Profession also factors into things. Employees at a hospital will likely be smarter than those at a tire shop.

Just walk around downtown and ask people random questions about Canadian history. You'll probably get very different results.

[Acajack]

goddamned cat-disliking frenchies.

i'd ship them all back to franceland if i could.

Moi aussi je t'aime! ;)

[Acajack]

Agreed cats are cocky sh*ts.. :haha:



Well, I don't exactly hate them I guess... I prefer dogs I suppose. Though I have neither as a pet.

[The_Architect]

And where did you do your co-op?

Profession also factors into things. Employees at a hospital will likely be smarter than those at a tire shop.

Just walk around downtown and ask people random questions about Canadian history. You'll probably get very different results.

An engineering/architecture/planning firm based in dt Toronto called IBI Group.

[Bdog]

Anyway Architect, please explan to me why 47% of Canadians don't know "O Canada, Out home and Native Land"?????

Looks like you don't even know the first line...;)

[vid]

An engineering/architecture/planning firm based in dt Toronto called IBI Group.

Well there you go. Polling them isn't an accurate sample of the population, it is a sample of educated professionals in the field of architecture and planning. So whatever number you came up with only really applies to that group of people.

A proper, accurate sample will include architects and Walmart associates, among hundreds of other professions.

[shreddog]

Looks like you don't even know the first line...;)Maybe that explains the 47%!:haha: I know I would certainly feel better if that was the cause!!!

[The_Architect]

Well there you go. Polling them isn't an accurate sample of the population, it is a sample of educated professionals in the field of architecture and planning. So whatever number you came up with only really applies to that group of people.

A proper, accurate sample will include architects and Walmart associates, among hundreds of other professions.

Though yes most of them are still students, I also include people who I worked with while on a co-op work term who range between 20 and 70. Yes, they are educated men and women who are obviously all smart, but that is just who I have to go by.

I did acknowledge the fact that it isn't a realistic representation, but I'm sure that over 50% of the country isn't stupid..