Quote:
Originally Posted by Mister F
Canada, for the most part, started out as an extension of Britain. The most fundamental aspects of our society - language, culture, religions, institutions - are all derived from Britain. It has nothing to do with "Anglo-Saxon stock" or ethnicity. Those of us who aren't of Anglo-Saxon stock are just as affected by the British roots of our country as those who are. These are fundamental things that will always tie us to them and always make them a bigger part of our consciousness than most other countries. It's the same way with the way Western culture pays more attention to ancient Greece and Rome than other civilizations of that era that were similarly dominant, like the Persians, Arabs or Chinese. This is never going to change regardless of how much Anglo-Saxon stock there is.
|
Another thing is, on that topic of media exposure of non-Anglophone countries, people say places like the US and Canada deemed "Anglo-Saxon" should be recognized as more diverse and look towards countries other than the UK (or the UK and France in Canada's case) since the people other than those settler groups should be recognized (eg. African Americans, Germans, Irish, Italians, Ukrainians, Jews, Chinese, Mexicans etc.).
But having people of those descent (aside from first generation immigrants) does not appear to make the average American or Canadian care more about those places than news from the UK.
Does having a large German American population or Italian American population, or Mexican American one, make Americans as whole follow Germany, Italy, or Mexico in the news more? I don't think so to that great of an extent, if at all.
Does having a large Ukrainian Canadian or Chinese Canadian population make Canadians as a whole follow Ukraine or China in the news more either? I don't think so either.