The myth of Canadian politeness
Is politeness equivalent to goodness?
I once apologized to someone and was surprised to be responded to with: don’t be so Canadian. But, then again, was I really that surprised?
The simplest—and most stereotypical—way to define Canadianess is politeness. “Sorry” is the most popular word in our vocabulary and we have a reputation for our goodness. Or so we like to tell ourselves.
The reality is that no nation is perfect, and Canada is no exception. The most recent controversy of the Canadian facade has been linked to direct ties made apparent with the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), responsible for the deaths and kidnaps of many in the US. Notable Canadian companies that have come under fire for their connections to ICE have included Jim Pattison Group, Hootsuite, and Roshel.
The ICE-involvement has caused people to question Canada’s national identity and forced Canadians online to confront their country’s missteps that have occurred throughout Canadian history.
The most marked atrocity that Canada has and continues to be involved in is its colonial campaign, like the Indigenous residential school system which only came to an end in 1996. Canada has been working for years to repair its ties to Indigenous peoples, declaring days like Truth and Reconciliation Day and weaving in practices like land acknowledgments. However, these acts often feel empty and are feed into the forced politeness of Canada.
If we are to define Canada’s symbolic national identity, we must define politeness. It is an act of courtesy to others. This act can be seen everyday in Canada for me—a “thank you” here and there, a quick to follow “sorry” when someone messes up, and yes, a land acknowledgment.
However, to me, politeness is an act that often barely scratches the surface of doing good for others. It is naturally steeped in passive behaviour and acts as a defense mechanism to avoid confrontation and direct involvement in an issue.
When politeness meets national identity, they clash. Not only does it cause Canadians, and other nations, to perceive our country through one characteristic, but it also causes Canada to be viewed as a country that will let itself be walked over, like being complicit in war, genocide and terror.
Although politeness is a defining Canadian trait, it cannot take place as an entire national identity. While it can be our strength, it can also limit us in how directly we address wrongdoings of other nations and our own.
Perhaps, it is not that Canada’s politeness is a myth, rather it is a myth that politeness equates to goodness.
It’s not to say Canada lacks goodness. It can be found in everyday life—a person holding open the door for another, or a cashier helping out an elderly customer—but these acts can often spread only so far as to one person.
With the Canadian government, politeness takes the place of goodness. Empty promises to do better, symbolic respect issued to nations, like the US, that are less deserving of it at this time. Politeness keeps ties intact, but it may stem from a fear of severing ties when necessary or making the right decision even though it may be deemed as wrong.
As the government and Canadian companies’ respond to current world affairs, such as the tensions regarding ICE, they act as the representative of the national identity on the world stage in turn casting a shadow over the people of Canada and how they are perceived by the rest of the world.
The problem with the myth of politeness will only be addressed once it is acknowledged by both civilians and those in positions of power. By recognizing the imperfections of our government, as a collective, Canadians are capable of reimagining a future for the country in which we take bolder stands against what we believe is wrong and bolder stands with what is right. With these stances, Canada must also approach new sustainable ways to carry on and maintain a reputation of goodness rather than simple politeness.
