Eurocentrism in Canadian education.
- Thread starter Machjo
- Start date
And why would that need to be revised? Exactly what do you mean by Eurocentrism anyway? In spite of the multicultural, multiracial nature of our society these days, an overwhelming majority of Canadians still are of European origin. So Eurocentrism does not seem all that out of place, always assuming the presence and contributions of other cultures are acknowledged.
But Europe is hardly a homogenous entity. By Eurocentrism, do you mean North Europe centrism, something that is centered around Britain, Germany, France, Scandinavia etc.? I hardly think there is any centrism involved regarding Albania, Serbia, Bosnia, Poland etc.
So exactly what do you mean by Eurocentrism?
But Europe is hardly a homogenous entity. By Eurocentrism, do you mean North Europe centrism, something that is centered around Britain, Germany, France, Scandinavia etc.? I hardly think there is any centrism involved regarding Albania, Serbia, Bosnia, Poland etc.
So exactly what do you mean by Eurocentrism?
I'd started this thread as a spin off from a discussion with CND Bear. I'll link to that in the next post in this thread.
Now as for what I meant by Eurocentrism, I meant a European world view and outlook. To take some examples, not all specifit to this or that province:
In Ontario, the compulsory language of instruction off reserve is French and English. French is also a compulsory second language across the province, a few exceptions aside. Why couldn't Algonquin be an equal option in the Ottawa area, for example.
As for Canadian history lessons, why is it that 'we' discuvered the 'New World' and not Europeans on boats? That depends on who 'we' is. If by 'we' we mean Europeans, then indeed 'we' discovered the 'New World'. If by we is meant the First Nations, then 'we' discovered a 'new people' on boats off our coasts. If there is no 'we', then the Europeans and indigenous Americans discovered one another, but that doesn't answer the fundamental quesiton of who 'we' is in terms of Canadians and Canadian history. If by 'we' is meant we who have lived or now live on this land, then 'we' (regardless of our family history, sicne this is referring generically to all of us who've lived on this land, past and present) discovered the Europeans on ships. So if the purpose of Canadian history lessons is to also form an inclusive notion of 'we'-ness, then it woudl make more sense for our history lessons to be more locally centred rather than Eurocentric, since then it could be inclusive of all who live in the land, rather than teaching that 'we' are foreigners. But then this woudl mean that 'our' historical language and culture is the local indigenous one, not a foreign one. This woudl require a complete overhaul of the angle from which history is presented, from the outside looking in to the inside looking out. If we are Canadians and not outsiders, then our Canadian history lessons ought to reflect that, presenting 'us' as insiders of the continent looking out to the rest of the world, having witnessed the Europeans (who are not 'us' anymore sinse 'we' then becomes all who live in North America).
In Ontario, the compulsory language of instruction off reserve is French and English. French is also a compulsory second language across the province, a few exceptions aside. Why couldn't Algonquin be an equal option in the Ottawa area, for example.
As for Canadian history lessons, why is it that 'we' discuvered the 'New World' and not Europeans on boats? That depends on who 'we' is. If by 'we' we mean Europeans, then indeed 'we' discovered the 'New World'. If by we is meant the First Nations, then 'we' discovered a 'new people' on boats off our coasts. If there is no 'we', then the Europeans and indigenous Americans discovered one another, but that doesn't answer the fundamental quesiton of who 'we' is in terms of Canadians and Canadian history. If by 'we' is meant we who have lived or now live on this land, then 'we' (regardless of our family history, sicne this is referring generically to all of us who've lived on this land, past and present) discovered the Europeans on ships. So if the purpose of Canadian history lessons is to also form an inclusive notion of 'we'-ness, then it woudl make more sense for our history lessons to be more locally centred rather than Eurocentric, since then it could be inclusive of all who live in the land, rather than teaching that 'we' are foreigners. But then this woudl mean that 'our' historical language and culture is the local indigenous one, not a foreign one. This woudl require a complete overhaul of the angle from which history is presented, from the outside looking in to the inside looking out. If we are Canadians and not outsiders, then our Canadian history lessons ought to reflect that, presenting 'us' as insiders of the continent looking out to the rest of the world, having witnessed the Europeans (who are not 'us' anymore sinse 'we' then becomes all who live in North America).
But it would cost too much to change all those books to reflect the truth - that the aboriginal peoples found a bunch of lost Europeans off their coast and helped them survive only to be treated as subhuman by the Euros.
You're right. And besides, 'we' found 'them' and then tried to civilize that bunch of savages in noble residential schools:-?
If they don't like it, they can go back to where they came from. Look at how they all come here and then expect 'us' to integrate? They act like they they were here first.
Ah, but god created white man in his own image! Aboriginals are not even mentioned in the bible. That is an arrogance that is still prevalent today, even among people who say they don't believe in the bible or its god. I think your use of the word Eurocentric has a double meaning here.
Quick ethnocentric facts!
John Cabot was the second (After Leif Ericson) European to "discover" the North American Continent.
Canada is a young country (FYI, Italy was unified in 1867 as well).
Elizabeth is Queen of Canada.
Canada has a Christian heritage.
Canada uses the Westminster Parliamentary Model.
Our national police force is the Royal CMP.
Every prairie town has a Royal Cafe.
Canada was founded by the French and English.
A Canadian who is of neither French nor English heritage is called an "ethnic."
The tail end of a chicken is called the "Pope's nose."
Etc!
John Cabot was the second (After Leif Ericson) European to "discover" the North American Continent.
Canada is a young country (FYI, Italy was unified in 1867 as well).
Elizabeth is Queen of Canada.
Canada has a Christian heritage.
Canada uses the Westminster Parliamentary Model.
Our national police force is the Royal CMP.
Every prairie town has a Royal Cafe.
Canada was founded by the French and English.
A Canadian who is of neither French nor English heritage is called an "ethnic."
The tail end of a chicken is called the "Pope's nose."
Etc!
That was my understanding after high school. No books need to be re-written. Anyone who has ever taken anthropology will know this is a common theme in the Westernization of the world.
I think, more important for education is the coming change in the world. China and it's rarely discussed cultural views regarding superiority, as well as racist tendencies. A growing world power, served by not colonialism, but more as a tributary system. China influences the countries around it, much greater than even Americas influence on Canada. Both Canada and the US are Westernized, and it is common throughout both of our countries. In that respect, our differences come more from being different nation states. While China, exerts it's civilization.
This is evident in SouthEast Asia, and becoming more evident elsewhere as China makes moves into other areas of the world. Look at Africa, where Angola rejected a loan from the IMF and all the strings concomitant to that loan, and instead accepts Chinese aid.
The questions this issue raises are much more important I think. But that is not to say that we shouldn't recognize what lead us, and our Western ways, to this point, and where we go from here. There is some talk of this now. Trade issues here in North America, spur discussions of increasing trade elsewhere, and most of that focus is on China.
The IMF and many other important world Institutions have been dominated by Eurocentric, or Western notions. We should be talking more about how this will fit with the growing power in the nations like China, India, Brazil, Indonesia, etc.
Who was after people from what is now northern France, who were after .....
Good illustration.
We speak English, a language from Europe. We write the Latin alphabet, also from Europe. This is why Canada is a multicultural country, Canadians speak English, and write Latin. Most countries are MC to one degree or another, whether they take in immigrants or not.
Of course! Race and ethnicity are not genetic; they are social constructs, largely fictional (mythic).
.....Everybody's originally from Africa, but I ain't goin back.Euro model suits me. Specially French avec le shrug.........oui?:glasses7:
'Cause you're lost?